I made a few changes that make a huge difference. Mainly drag is much much
much faster than click at
on mouseUp
select card image 1
delete card image 1
put 300 into XX
put 300 into YY
put 200 into RR
choose brush tool
set brush to 32
set brushcolor to "blue"
put -((pi/
>At 7:59 PM -0800 2/10/02, Geoff Canyon wrote:
>>Finally, pre-loading the data into an array variable instead was
>>faster still (not counting the time to load the array): 9 ticks.
>
>At 9:02 PM -0800 2/10/02, Ken Norris (dialup) wrote:
>>Yeow! These are some pretty impressive numbers. The tricks
for starters i'd probably store the result of 1.5*pi so it wouldn't have to
do the calculation every loop through the repeat and maybe the addition into
a variable too
- Original Message -
> on mouseUp
> select card image 1
> delete card image 1
> put 300 into XX
> put 300 into Y
Ken,
Can you speed this up?
on mouseUp
select card image 1
delete card image 1
put 300 into XX
put 300 into YY
put 200 into RR
choose brush tool
set brush to 32
set brushcolor to "blue"
put -((pi/2)-(pi/584)) into Rad
repeat until Rad>=1.5*pi
click at XX+round(RR*cos (Rad
At 7:59 PM -0800 2/10/02, Geoff Canyon wrote:
>Finally, pre-loading the data into an array variable instead was faster still (not
>counting the time to load the array): 9 ticks.
At 9:02 PM -0800 2/10/02, Ken Norris (dialup) wrote:
>Yeow! These are some pretty impressive numbers. The tricks you
>Finally, pre-loading the data into an array variable instead was
>faster still (not counting the time to load the array): 9 ticks.
>
>Using one of the built-in functions (Filter is my favorite) on a
>pre-built data set would probably be even faster.
>
>regards,
>
>Geoff
can you give an examp
on 2/10/02 7:59 PM, Geoff Canyon at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> But there's no need to actually go to the cards:
> Using the form: fld "comments" of cd i of stack "revDocsLanguageReference"
> took 90 ticks (1.5 seconds)
>
> Setting the defaultStack property and simply using fld "comments" of cd i
At 11:59 PM +0100 2/10/02, Pierre Delain wrote:
>I find out with great surprise and disappointment that Revolution is much
>slower then HyperCard.
>I have a stack with 2163 cards, and a script containing the following loop :
I love a challenge like this :-)
I wrote a script similar to the one gi
IL PROTECTED]
Web Site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/
- Original Message -
From: "Pierre Delain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2002 4:59 PM
Subject: Revolution much slower then Hypercard
> I find out with great surprise and
Pierre
I haven't noticed any significant speed difference in my own use.
Not knowing how many cards you have or how much data in each field, I
created 263 cards (via a script which created a card for each line of
some text I grabbed, happening to be 263 lines) putting random chunks
from each
I find out with great surprise and disappointment that Revolution is much
slower then HyperCard.
I have a stack with 2163 cards, and a script containing the following loop :
repeat with CV = 1 to NBR
go card CV
if fld "ThProp" contains T or fld "proposition" contains ¬
T or fld "numer
11 matches
Mail list logo
