On 9/17/13, Hans-Peter Diettrich <[email protected]> wrote: >> So, I conclude they perform roughly the same. > > Thanks for testing :-) > > Did you only test the 3-byte case, or also for WORD and DWORD cases? I
My FillDWord code is 20 times faster (with N being equal, so Length(Result) being 1.33 times bigger) faster thean the code used for the 3-byte sequence. The FillWord code is 28 times faster than 3-byte code (N-2-byte being 1,5 * N-3-byte, so Length(Result) being equal). Testing with all results being of equal length: 10000 calls to Utf8StringOfChar (120000 * 1-byte): 15 ticks. 10000 calls to Utf8StringOfChar (60000 * 2-byte): 16 ticks. //FillWord 10000 calls to Utf8StringOfChar (40000 * 3-byte): 561 ticks. 10000 calls to Utf8StringOfChar (30000 * 4-byte): 16 ticks. //FillDword Bart -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
