Result of latest DocKimbel version on my Dell laptop...
>> Elapsed time for adding 20 records 0:00:01.221
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 4:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [REBOL] Re: Profiling Rebol API to DyB
Hi, Maxim,
There's more to the story, although YMMV...
Maxim Olivier-Adlhoch wrote:
>
> describe: func [x [integer!] y [integer!]] [
> switch true compose [
> (x = 1) ["X is one"]
> (y = 1) ["Y is one"]
> (x = 2) ["X is two"]
> (y =
sorry for being late, but note that this works, straight out of the box:
describe: func [x [integer!] y [integer!]] [
switch true compose [
(x = 1) ["X is one"]
(y = 1) ["Y is one"]
(x = 2) ["X is two"]
(y = 2) ["Y is two"]
Hello Romano,
Friday, December 19, 2003, 2:51:19 PM, you wrote:
RPT> Hi,
RPT> Just seem that clear waste hash table, perhaps this is a bug in clear.
Yes, I already noticed it.
So it is much cheaper to create new object than clean existed.
RPT> These are my tests:
>>> i: 10 loop 5 [recy
Hi,
Just seem that clear waste hash table, perhaps this is a bug in clear.
These are my tests:
>> i: 10 loop 5 [recycle s: now/precise h: make hash! i * 2 + 2 repeat n i
[find h n insert insert tail h n
make object! [a: 1] if 99 = (n // 100)[clear h]] print [i difference
now/precise s] i:
New optimized version of Rebol API to DyBASE is available at
http://www.garret.ru/~knizhnik/dybase.html
I was managed to increase speed of testindex.r example 4 times by optimizing work with
hash
tables. Unfortunately, the problem is not completely solved and for
large number of cached objects, p
Hi Konstantin,
Here's a version executing 10 times faster. I just changed h series type from
hash! to list!. Looks like in your case, cost for adding data is much higher
than for searching keys...
Regards,
-DocKimbel
n: 20
h: make list! n
l: make block! n
start: now/time/precise
repeat i
