Hello,
Opening a new empty figure (without drawing anything) is a so common
elementary task and it has become so long that i have built a short
benchmark about it from Scilab 4.1.2 to Scilab 6.0.
Detailed results are here-below. The main conclusions are the following:
1. with no pre-existing figure,*scf**() is **20 times slower in **5.5
and 6.0 than in *its best performances in *5.3.0*. On my computer,
it takes 0.062 s with 5.3.0 and 1.3 s now (5.5.2|6.0).
Scilab 5.4.0, 5.4.1 and 5.5.0 have dramatically damaged performances.
The loss is even 10x bigger with figure(): it is ~200 times slower
with Scilab 5.5 & 6.0 than with Scilab 4.1.2
2. Since Scilab 5.5.0, the time taken to open a new figure increases
linearly with the number of already opened figures. On my computer,
opening the first one (after loading scf()) takes 1.8 s, and opening
the 20th one takes almost 10 s. This is still the case with Scilab 6.0.
*Detailled results: *
1. Opening the first figure :
Only 2 tests are reported with figure() instead of scf().
t=0; for i=1:50, tic(); scf(); t=t+toc(); xdel(); end; t, t/50
[s] [s] 4.1.2 base figure()
6.0.0 : 62.39/50 1.248 18.5 2.32
5.5.2 : 73.62/50 1.4723 21.8
5.5.0 : 69.94/50 1.3988 20.8
5.4.1 : 37.33/50 0.7466 11.1
5.4.0 : 24.07/50 0.4814 7.14
5.3.0 : 3.102/50 0.0620 0.92
5.1.0 : 4.069/50 0.0814 1.21
4.1.2 : 3.370/50 0.0674 1.00 0.014
2. Opening 20 figures :
t=[]; for i=1:20, tic(); scf(); t(i)=toc(); end; sum(t)/20
6.0.0 : 5.30 [1.35 => 9.51]
5.5.2 : 5.68 [1.77 => 9.92]
5.5.0 : 5.66 [1.82 => 9.85] range from the #1 to #20
5.4.1 : 1.18
5.4.0 : 0.923
5.3.0 : 0.110
5.1.0 :
4.1.2 : 0.0774
Samuel
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users