| To: | <realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Performance and faster idioms |
| From: | Michael Wolf <trsho at swcp dot com> |
| Date: | Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:30:51 -0700 |
| Delivered-to: | realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com |
> >> I used microseconds to calculate the timing and I continue to get >> about 3x >> speed on if-then. Using ticks I get larger difference: 9x > > That doesn't make any sense... Why should the timing method you use > influence the total speed of the test code? I would think this means > there's something wrong with the test or the calculations somewhere. > > -Thomas Ticks are really a poor thing to use for timing checks as they are low priority and when something is running it will keep them from firing. Therefore you will get really flakey results, especially on a tight loop when the processor is busy a lot of the time. Microseconds are taken from an internal system timer and are much more accurate. Perhaps if the ticks routine was run in a separate thread it'd be more accurate. I only use ticks (and timers) for rough timing. Michael _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives of this list here: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html> |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Performance and faster idioms, Massimo Valle |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Working with Word Document, tom . russell |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Performance and faster idioms, Theodore H.Smith |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Performance and faster idioms, Michael Wolf |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |