--- AnyEvent/lib/AnyEvent.pm	2008/04/26 04:19:52	1.93
+++ AnyEvent/lib/AnyEvent.pm	2008/04/27 19:36:55	1.101
@@ -68,7 +68,6 @@
 useful) and you want to force your users to use the one and only event
 model, you should I<not> use this module.
 
-
 =head1 DESCRIPTION
 
 L<AnyEvent> provides an identical interface to multiple event loops. This
@@ -460,6 +459,78 @@
 loading the C<AnyEvent::Impl::Perl> module, which gives you similar
 behaviour everywhere, but letting AnyEvent chose is generally better.
 
+=head1 OTHER MODULES
+
+The following is a non-exhaustive list of additional modules that use
+AnyEvent and can therefore be mixed easily with other AnyEvent modules
+in the same program. Some of the modules come with AnyEvent, some are
+available via CPAN.
+
+=over 4
+
+=item L<AnyEvent::Util>
+
+Contains various utility functions that replace often-used but blocking
+functions such as C<inet_aton> by event-/callback-based versions.
+
+=item L<AnyEvent::Handle>
+
+Provide read and write buffers and manages watchers for reads and writes.
+
+=item L<AnyEvent::Socket>
+
+Provides a means to do non-blocking connects, accepts etc.
+
+=item L<AnyEvent::HTTPD>
+
+Provides a simple web application server framework.
+
+=item L<AnyEvent::DNS>
+
+Provides asynchronous DNS resolver capabilities, beyond what
+L<AnyEvent::Util> offers.
+
+=item L<AnyEvent::FastPing>
+
+The fastest ping in the west.
+
+=item L<Net::IRC3>
+
+AnyEvent based IRC client module family.
+
+=item L<Net::XMPP2>
+
+AnyEvent based XMPP (Jabber protocol) module family.
+
+=item L<Net::FCP>
+
+AnyEvent-based implementation of the Freenet Client Protocol, birthplace
+of AnyEvent.
+
+=item L<Event::ExecFlow>
+
+High level API for event-based execution flow control.
+
+=item L<Coro>
+
+Has special support for AnyEvent.
+
+=item L<IO::Lambda>
+
+The lambda approach to I/O - don't ask, look there. Can use AnyEvent.
+
+=item L<IO::AIO>
+
+Truly asynchronous I/O, should be in the toolbox of every event
+programmer. Can be trivially made to use AnyEvent.
+
+=item L<BDB>
+
+Truly asynchronous Berkeley DB access. Can be trivially made to use
+AnyEvent.
+
+=back
+
 =cut
 
 package AnyEvent;
@@ -946,7 +1017,7 @@
     CoroEV/Any   100000   244   2.49   0.44    0.29 coroutines + Coro::Signal
       Perl/Any   100000   513   4.92   0.87    1.12 pure perl implementation
    Event/Event    16000   516  31.88  31.30    0.85 Event native interface
-     Event/Any    16000   936  39.17  33.63    1.43 Event + AnyEvent watchers
+     Event/Any    16000   590  35.75  31.42    1.08 Event + AnyEvent watchers
       Glib/Any    16000  1357  98.22  12.41   54.00 quadratic behaviour
         Tk/Any     2000  1860  26.97  67.98   14.00 SEGV with >> 2000 watchers
      POE/Event     2000  6644 108.64 736.02   14.73 via POE::Loop::Event
@@ -961,6 +1032,16 @@
 the same time, so select/poll-based implementations get an unnatural speed
 boost.
 
+Also, note that the number of watchers usually has a nonlinear effect on
+overall speed, that is, creating twice as many watchers doesn't take twice
+the time - usually it takes longer. This puts event loops tested with a
+higher number of watchers at a disadvantage.
+
+To put the range of results into perspective, consider that on the
+benchmark machine, handling an event takes roughly 1600 CPU cycles with
+EV, 3100 CPU cycles with AnyEvent's pure perl loop and almost 3000000 CPU
+cycles with POE.
+
 C<EV> is the sole leader regarding speed and memory use, which are both
 maximal/minimal, respectively. Even when going through AnyEvent, it uses
 far less memory than any other event loop and is still faster than Event
@@ -1045,7 +1126,7 @@
 =head3 Explanation of the columns
 
 I<sockets> is the number of sockets, and twice the number of "servers" (as
-eahc server has a read and write socket end).
+each server has a read and write socket end).
 
 I<create> is the time it takes to create a socketpair (which is
 nontrivial) and two watchers: an I/O watcher and a timeout watcher.
@@ -1059,7 +1140,7 @@
 
     name sockets create  request 
       EV   20000  69.01    11.16 
-    Perl   20000  75.28   112.76 
+    Perl   20000  73.32    35.87 
    Event   20000 212.62   257.32 
     Glib   20000 651.16  1896.30 
      POE   20000 349.67 12317.24 uses POE::Loop::Event
@@ -1115,9 +1196,9 @@
 
     name sockets create request 
       EV      16  20.00    6.54 
+    Perl      16  25.75   12.62 
    Event      16  81.27   35.86 
     Glib      16  32.63   15.48 
-    Perl      16  24.62  162.37 
      POE      16 261.87  276.28 uses POE::Loop::Event
 
 =head3 Discussion
@@ -1125,7 +1206,9 @@
 The benchmark tries to test the performance of a typical small
 server. While knowing how various event loops perform is interesting, keep
 in mind that their overhead in this case is usually not as important, due
-to the small absolute number of watchers.
+to the small absolute number of watchers (that is, you need efficiency and
+speed most when you have lots of watchers, not when you only have a few of
+them).
 
 EV is again fastest.
 
@@ -1136,7 +1219,7 @@
 
 The pure perl event loop is much slower, but still competitive.
 
-POE also performs much better in this case, but is is stillf ar behind the
+POE also performs much better in this case, but is is still far behind the
 others.
 
 =head3 Summary