Tommi M�kitalo sent the following bits through the ether:
> Then you can do perl -e 'use Math::Log10; print log10(43.2);', which is 3
> times faster than perl -e 'use POSIX qw(log10); print log10(43.2);'.
Did someone say something about a benchmark?
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
use Benchmark qw(cmpthese);
use POSIX qw(log10);
cmpthese(-10, {
'POSIX' => sub {
foreach my $i (1..100) {
my $x = log10($i);
}
},
'Perl' => sub {
foreach my $i (1..100) {
my $x = log($i)/log(10);
}
},
});
Which on my computer gives:
Benchmark: running POSIX, Perl for at least 10 CPU seconds...
POSIX: 1 wallclock secs (10.67 usr + 0.01 sys = 10.68 CPU) @ 369.85/s (n=3950)
Perl: 1 wallclock secs (10.69 usr + 0.01 sys = 10.70 CPU) @ 413.74/s (n=4427)
Rate POSIX Perl
POSIX 370/s -- -11%
Perl 414/s 12% --
Leon
ps I think a module for this is a little over the top, however
I note that Python has log10 in its math package, Ruby
has log10 in its Math package, and Java does not ship log10
in java.lang.Math.
--
Leon Brocard.............................http://www.astray.com/
scribot.................................http://www.scribot.com/
... Barium: what you do with dead chemists
