Director may have faults and even some bugs ...after 10 versions, too. The people at Macromedia should continue doing everything they can to build a better product. But I enjoy the product as it is and I will enjoy the next version even more ...and with appreciation for their efforts to improve it. I have used Director since version 3. It is a wonderful development environment for people like me who don't want to become codeheads, who look at the art and the design first, and then enjoy the ability to give it life. Because of Director, I have learned about OOP structures and I use them in my code and I am more efficient as a result. Even though I'm used to the old ways, I even use dot syntax constructs. I don't think I would have been able to do these things in C++ without a lot of formal training in programming.
So what if Lingo is 95 times less efficient than C++ (if we are to accept the benchmarks submitted so far)? If you need that kind of speed, use C++. For me, Director and Lingo works and it works very well. Thank you for a great software tool that gives me a lot of pleasure to use.
------------------------------------------------- Ronald Woodland -- St. George, Utah 84770 ------------------------------------------------- This email is a natural human product. Slight variations in spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and should in no way be considered flaws or defects.
On Jan 6, 2005, at 9:28 AM, Tim Welford wrote:
So, after more than 10 versions, does anybody have any idea why the backend is still so inefficient?
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Valentin Schmidt Sent: 06 January 2005 13:13 To: Lingo programming discussion list Subject: Re: <lingo-l> Lingo repeat loop versus other languages
I had already tested this as well, changes the ratio a bit, but no big difference, in lingo I get 22700 ms (instead of 27000), in c it's the same as before (arround 240 ms), so the ratio is then 95:1
Valentin
Mark Whybird wrote:
What if you leave out the j=1?
(i.e., just test an empty repeat loop)
The test given could equally be proving only that the command "j=1" is 100 times slower in lingo than VC++.
I expect the real answer is somewhere in between.
On my machine: (DMX04)
-- "With j=1: 14923" -- "Without j=1: 10614"
but I don't have C++ to test how that goes without anything actually happening in the loop. A guess at extrapolation from your figures and mine would suggest lingo is about 60 or 70 times slower (which is still lots slower, as you would expect).
-- Mark Whybird
my code:
on dotests
ms0 = the milliseconds repeat with i = 1 to 100000000 j=1 end repeat ms1 = the milliseconds put "With j=1: " & (ms1-ms0)
ms0 = the milliseconds repeat with i = 1 to 100000000 end repeat ms1 = the milliseconds put "Without j=1: " & (ms1-ms0)
end dotests
Valentin Schmidt wrote:
A) Lingo (DMX) ms0 = the milliseconds repeat with i = 1 to 100000000 j=1 end repeat ms1 = the milliseconds put (ms1-ms0)
-- 26917
B) VC++ 6.0, console app ... _ftime( &tstruct0 ); for (i=0; i<100000000; i++) j=1; _ftime( &tstruct1 ); ...
--> 240 (milliseconds)
So a ratio of about 100:1 on my computer.
Valentin
Pedja wrote:
I don't know if I've asked this before (sorry if I have)
Just out of curiosity does anyone know is there any speed difference between Lingo's repeat loop and a repeat loop in some other languages (C++,Java..etc)
I know it all depends on what's inside the loop but theoretically if it's just a simple 1+1 is it the same?
Cheerio
Pedja
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email [email protected] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email [email protected] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email [email protected] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email [email protected] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email [email protected] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
