Roger Pack wrote:
> 
>> Hi, Roger
>> updated gem and made two series of shots with the same two 
>> RUBY_PROF_CPU_FREQUENCY values. Both RUBY_PROF_CPU_FREQUENCY values 
>> 178241142 and 1782411428 result in 18-19 secs
>> 
>> Now it reports more realistic - 18 secs while it took about 23 secs as 
>> showed my watch. A compared my watch to computer clock, and found it's 
>> ok ) Could the difference take place due to concurrent process execution 
>> environment?
> 
> Note well that it won't actually use RUBY_PROF_CPU_FREQUENCY unless you 
> specify --mode=cpu
> 
> Thanks!
> -rp

Roger,
I like ruby-prof, and find it very helpful. Thank you for it! And best 
wishes )

Zhoran
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.