Hmm, I don't think you are correct Brian. I just whipped up a test of
string concatenation.
Please spare the "proper load test" flames. This is NOT a load test--
it is intended to make a process run long enough to capture a thread
stack. Actually, in the context of large file generations I would call
it quite appropriate.
Concatenation "Hello World. " together 30 thousand times on CF 7.0.2 Ent
(Win) shows a vast difference between using & and simply outputting it
inside a cfsavecontent.
The & definitely spent all its time doing a Java.lang.String.concat().
The cfsavecontent not only executed 211 times faster, I didn't see a
single String.contat() happening.
Here are the results:
And here is the code:
<cfset string1 = "">
<cftimer label="string & string&" type="outline">
<cfloop from="1" to="30000" index="i">
<cfset string1 = string1 & "Hello World. ">
</cfloop>
</cftimer>
<cfoutput>String Length: #len(string1)#</cfoutput>
<cfsetting enablecfoutputonly="true">
<cftimer label="cfsavecontent" type="outline">
<cfsavecontent variable="string2">
<cfloop from="1" to="30000" index="i">
<cfoutput>Hello World.</cfoutput>
</cfloop>
</cfsavecontent>
</cftimer>
<cfsetting enablecfoutputonly="false">
<cfoutput>String Length: #len(string2)#</cfoutput>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to
date
Get the Free Trial
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;192386516;25150098;k
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:306707
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
