On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 11:51:25 +0100
Miguel Angel Marchuet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> running speedtst with, we are more near from harbour speed:
>
> # define malloc( n ) ( void * ) HeapAlloc( GetProcessHeap(), 0, ( n
> ) )
> # define realloc( p, n ) ( void * ) HeapReAlloc( GetProcessHeap(), 0, (
> void * ) ( p ), ( n ) )
> # define free( p ) HeapFree( GetProcessHeap(), 0, ( void * ) ( p )
> )
>
......
> s:=f4() -> 32.83
....
> ascan(a,{|x|x==i%ARR_LEN}) -> 6.39
> ============================================================
> total application time: 74.34
> total real time: 75.61
>
>
> with
>
> # define malloc( n ) ( void * ) LocalAlloc( LMEM_FIXED, ( n ) )
> # define realloc( p, n ) ( void * ) LocalReAlloc( ( HLOCAL ) ( p ), ( n
> ), LMEM_MOVEABLE )
> # define free( p ) LocalFree( ( HLOCAL ) ( p ) )
>
.....
> s:=f4() -> 59.84
....
> ============================================================
> total application time: 101.69
> total real time: 103.66
>
> and with harbour :
>
.....
> s:=f4() -> 32.02
....
> ===========================================================
> total application time: 63.86
> total real time: 65.33
>
After all, the most significant speed difference based on the test
program is on : f4(), which return space(50000) which I don't think a
good programnmer will call it the way the test program does.
Personally, I'd prefer stability rather that speed of this kind :-)
--
Andi
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
xHarbour-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xharbour-developers
