Ok, I ran the code I listed (it ran the first time, can you believe it?:). The first time it ran it returned this: Runtime for scoped is 77.81 Seconds. Runtime for non-scoped is 49.22 Seconds.
Ok, I should have divided the ticks by 100 instead of 10. That's actually 7.781 and 4.922 seconds, respectively. The second time I ran it, I moved the second timer to the top of the code. Not that it should matter, but just to make sure everything is on the level.. Runtime for scoped is 51.71 Seconds. Runtime for non-scoped is 73.6 Seconds. Ok, so obviously I need to run each of these on a page by itself.. So I seperated them into two seperate templates and ran each 4 times.. Here's what I came up with.. Scoped: 7.703 7.688 7.656 7.656 ------ 7.676 avg sec Non-Scoped: 7.359 7.406 7.390 7.844 ------ 7.500 avg sec This isn't the most scientific thing, especially since this was done on a development machine, but I think it shows an interesting trend at least.. Looks like if you're naming 100,000 local variables, you could save a total of .2 seconds by NOT specifying the 'variables' scope. Who knew! Regards, Seth ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email server is running an evaluation copy of the MailShield anti- spam software. Please contact your email administrator if you have any questions about this message. MailShield product info: www.mailshield.com ----------------------------------------------- To post, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe / unsubscribe: http://www.dfwcfug.org
