| Su | Mo | Tu | We | Th | Fr | Sa |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 |
Browse archives
|
Shark
Submitted by reeses on Sun, 2004-01-25 16:35.
Shark is the shibnibble. I discovered this last night at Ranchero, and played around with it to optimise some Objective C/Foundation Kit stuff I had written. Easiest. Profiler. Ever. Admittedly, it doesn't give you all the information a profiler would. However, if you're concerned primarily with opportunistic optimisation, cpu utilisation, and hot spots in your code, literally five minutes with this baby will melt that stick of butter in your pocket. How easy is it?
No, I didn't leave out the part where you recompile your application with profiling flags. No, I didn't leave out the part where the app was insanely slow while profiling was going on. I suspect it's a shame, however. While I've been working primarily in Java for five or more years now, I've been doing all of my Mac coding in Objective C. I realised the silliness of it, as all of the AppKit/FoundationKit stuff is exposed to Java. I like my Java IDE* better, I like Java gc better, and, honestly, except for dynamic code, I like Java better than *C. The reason I suspect it's a shame is that I'm not at all sure how well Shark will work with Java, and Shark is just...so...nice. *Speaking of which, IDEA 4.0 doesn't look all that impressive from an upgrade perspective. I can't recall if I bought the maintenance when I bought my license, either. If I did, I'll upgrade, but otherwise...probably not. Post new comment |
SearchSimilar entriesUser login |