RE: [CFCDev] CFINVOKE vs. Evaluate

[Nolan Erck]

“it demonstrates a lack of understanding of the features of the language”   I don’t like this point (and I’m really not trying to single out Brian at all – this is just the point where I felt like chiming into the conversation).  Yes evaluate() is slow, but because someone uses “feature A” instead of “feature B” of a language, I disagree that it always is because of a lack of understanding of features.    I’ve written apps in the past, and in keeping with the “make it work now, make it fast later” ideals (which sometimes have to be followed, depending on your work environment and schedule…Doug are you out there? Back me up here! :) ), I will write code in the first way I can think of that gets the job done.  Sometimes things are out of my control, and I _have_ to wait for version 2 before I can go in and remove calls to evaluate(), and other poorly/quickly written sections of code.   And if I’m writing a library that I need to get _working_ now, I know there are spots that I’ve used evaluate() to get something done.    Everything has it’s place…     .02 -nolan       Nolan Erck Web Developer/Programmer Schools Financial Credit Union (916) 569-5409 Office (916) 569-2024 Fax www.schools.org -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Kotek Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 11:14 AM To: CFCDev@cfczone.org Subject: Re: [CFCDev] CFINVOKE vs. Evaluate   The point is that in virtually all cases: 1. evaluate() is slower 2. there is no reason to use it 3. it is more difficult to read and understand 4. it demonstrates a lack of understanding of the features of the language On 5/18/06, Roland Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Resent without the "SPAM" flags ;)   I've actually posted metrics on this before – and you're pretty much right.  The performance penalties of using evaluate are trivial at best, and often times non-existent.  The metrics below demonstrate that, given server conditions, the evaluate code can even perform faster than inline code  Anyway, it's *very* clear from the results that the overhead of evaluate is largely over-hyped.  Also, attached are the two test files I used to generate the metrics.   Simple _expression_ - 10,000 Iterations   Inline Evaluate Run 1 32 62 Run 2 31 78 Run 3 16 62 Run 4 31 79 Run 5 31 63 Average 28.2 68.8       Simple _expression_ - 100,000 Iterations   Inline Evaluate Run 1 328 437 Run 2 312 828 Run 3 297 485 Run 4 313 828 Run 5 312 578 Average 312.4 631.2       Object Invocation - 1000 Iterations   Inline Evaluate Run 1 1830 2190 Run 2 1328 1391 Run 3 1437 1078 Run 4 1313 1843 Run 5 1843 1688 Average 1550.2 1638       Object Invocation - 10000 Iterations   Inline Evaluate Run 1 14375 11672 Run 2 14250 20187 Run 3 17140 20828 Run 4 18328 11735 Run 5 20453 20125 Average 16909.2 16909.4   Roland   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Brian Rinaldi Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 11:05 AM To: CFCDev@cfczone.org Subject: SPAM: Re: [CFCDev] CFINVOKE vs. Evaluate   I only recently started watching this thread, but this seems to me that the "avoid evaluate()" rule generally doesn't have much documented justification (though I am not arguing that it isn't valid - just that I have rarely seen much documentation on the differences - if I missed some earlier in this thread I apologize in advance). The ColdFusion MX Coding Guidlines only says the following under Performance "Don'ts": "Don't use evaluate() - Avoid evaluate() unless there is no other way to write your code (and there is almost always another way to write your code)." A Google search only comes up with the following posts (the first being recent and the second a couple years old): http://cfprimer.blogspot.com/2005/03/avoid-evaluate.html http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2004/02/19/running-performance-metrics-on-coldfusion-functions-and-operators/ An MXNA search comes up with some more recent posts: http://www.succor.co.uk/index.cfm/2006/4/13/Avoid-evaluate-always http://www.blogoffusion.com/index.cfm/2006/4/18/Structure-style-evaluation-rocks However, nobody seems to offer specific metrics (except for one that came to the conclusion that the differences were minimal). Let me be clear, I am not arguing that this isn't a completely valid best practice - I am sure at some point it was based upon some documented metrics, but it would be nice to see them. - Brian Rinaldi blog: http://www.remotesynthesis.com/blog ColdFusion Open Source List: http://www.remotesynthesis.com/cfopensourcelist Boston CFUG - http://www.bostoncfug.org From: "Nick Tong - TalkWebSolutions.co.uk" < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2006 10:49 AM To: CFCDev@cfczone.org Subject: Re: [CFCDev] CFINVOKE vs. Evaluate On 18/05/06, Peter Bell wrote: > So, would cf invoke actually be any faster? I think this can depend on if you have initiated the object into memory i.e. in this case then i believe it is faster -- Nick Tong web: http://talkwebsolutions.co.uk blog: http://succor.co.uk shorturls: http://wapurl.co.uk ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to cfcdev@cfczone.org with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.cfxhosting.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to cfcdev@cfczone.org with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting ( www.cfxhosting.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to cfcdev@cfczone.org with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.cfxhosting.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may contain privileged information exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, employee, or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete the message from your computer and immediately notify the sender by telephone (you may call collect) at 916-569-5400 or by e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank you. ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to cfcdev@cfczone.org with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.cfxhosting.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org