Thanks for that info and link, Robert! Obviously, we who develop web
apps for normal users should leave the setting alone most of the time,
but good to know we can change it for these sorts of tests. (And wow,
I thought it was a time limit; that explains why something I was doing
the other day was
T.J.
Be sure you've unchecked the normalize results checkbox. That will get
rid of the infinite ops/sec.
FWIW, that checkbox is provided as a way of subtracting out the time
required to do an empty loop when computing test performance. In 99% of
cases, where you're interested in testing the
Here is a small quoted text from Andrea Giammarchi on tweetter:
[quote]
i++ returns a new Number with i value then increments the i
reference, while ++i execute just the second step -
that is why I prefer ++i
[/quote]
this should be the same with both pre-increment and pre-decrement
and in my
Not to be a curmudgeon about it -- I'll just point out that the CPU cycles
consumed in processing the email for this discussion far exceeds the CPU
cycles saved by all the code the lot of you will ever write with such
tweaks.
Purely entertainment / mental game play.
If you want to improve
+1,000,000,000 (cycles)
-1 on downplaying really nerdy optimizations :)
you curmudgeon you (nice word, btw)
---
Warm Regards,
Ryan Gahl
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Bob Kerns r...@acm.org wrote:
Not to be a curmudgeon about it -- I'll just point out that the CPU cycles
consumed in
Forget the CPU cycles, it's the brain cycles I want back.
But it was all worth it to learn about JSLitmus. :-)
On Dec 17, 3:33 pm, Bob Kerns r...@acm.org wrote:
Not to be a curmudgeon about it -- I'll just point out that the CPU cycles
consumed in processing the email for this discussion far
