Re: publish and surprise

On 10/2/19 6:59 AM, Paul Dupuis via use-livecode wrote: I would love to see a publish and subscribe system in the engine for use in Standalone. I made a PubSub dispatcher library some years ago. If the livecodeshare or whatever it's called now website is back in operation it should be there.

Re: publish and surprise

upuis via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: On 10/1/2019 11:52 PM, Mark Wieder via use-livecode wrote: I have finally gotten around to noticing that LC9.x builds have opened the publish-and-subscribe mechanism to arbitrary messages. I'm not sure when this happened an

Re: publish and surprise

gotten around to noticing that LC9.x builds have opened > > the publish-and-subscribe mechanism to arbitrary messages. I'm not > > sure when this happened and I'm really not inclined to go searching > > through all those release notes, but I'm ecstatic over the surprise > > di

Re: publish and surprise

notes, but I'm ecstatic over the surprise discovery. This means objects can register interest in certain messages to do something like object1: revIDESubscribe "helloworld" object2: revIDESubscribe "helloworld" object3: ideMessageSendWithParameters "helloworld"

publish and surprise

I have finally gotten around to noticing that LC9.x builds have opened the publish-and-subscribe mechanism to arbitrary messages. I'm not sure when this happened and I'm really not inclined to go searching through all those release notes, but I'm ecstatic over the surprise discovery

Re: Surprise...

Mark T: > In my particular use of arrays and lists, I find the > lists to be a little more than 2 times faster Thanks! (Noting: particular use, and methods used.) Optimizing LCS is extremely important, and methods that are great for testing items and arrays themselves may not be the fastest

Re: Surprise...

Hi Curry, The stack can be found here: http://canelasoftware.com/pub/livecode/GetColumnCode.zip In my particular use of arrays and lists, I find the lists to be a little more than 2 times faster than arrays. This test is operating off

Re: Surprise...

Brian, Thanks for running all these tests. On the same topic, I'd like to mention that I use "intersect" with arrays a lot in some scripts (for complex requests it is sometimes faster to load raw data from mySQL and process it with arrays), and "intersect" is really fast in LC9... On Tue,

Re: Surprise...

Curry Kenworthy wrote: > In case I was unclear, I just meant that the engine still can and > should be optimized! As time and budget allows of course, but > certainly doable. You know I'm fairly obsessive about performance. Does anyone here have benchmarks comparing LC to Python, JavaScript,

Re: Surprise...

The one optimization that would really help in this particular torture test would be native lists. Then you go from a hash lookup to an index lookup. I know it will be faster than array, but not sure where it would switch over and be faster than item. On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 5:33 PM, Curry

Re: Surprise...

In case I was unclear, I just meant that the engine still can and should be optimized! As time and budget allows of course, but certainly doable. I doubt it's only the Unicode and nothing else, but either way it doesn't rule out future speed gains. Unicode shouldn't need to slow down

Re: Surprise...

I am pretty sure it was the unicode. Notice that 7 took a major hit, but then dramatically improved in 8 and had another step in 9 (for the item). Doesn't look like the array portion changed much after the rewrite (did take a slight step back from 7 to 8, but improved with 9). On Tue, Aug 21,

Re: Surprise...

maybe when the new chunk types were added it put some overhead on operations on other chunks? weird On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 4:27 PM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Wasn't it Unicode that slowed everything, especially string parsing down? > > Bob S > > > >

Re: Surprise...

Wasn't it Unicode that slowed everything, especially string parsing down? Bob S > On Aug 21, 2018, at 11:00 , Curry Kenworthy via use-livecode > wrote: > > Brian: > > > I expanded my test stack and ran it > > on the versions I had available. > > Thanks for (among other things!) running

Re: Surprise...

Brian: > I expanded my test stack and ran it > on the versions I had available. Thanks for (among other things!) running these tests. It's useful to see the item vs array turning point. I also notice something else, if I read your result correctly: LC9 beats LC8 on these tests (that's a

Re: Surprise...

I expanded my test stack and ran it on the versions I had available. Here's a couple of tests from each version: macOS Sierra (10.12.6) on an iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014) 4 GHz i7 9.0.1-rc-1 Business / 8.1.9 Business / 7.1.4 Indy / 6.7.11 Indy 34 10 11 10 34 5 LC9 item: 4562 / array:

Re: Surprise...

While this test may be valuable in comparing different versions of LC, I'm not sure how useful the data is by itself. I decided to run a test and see what happened. I defined 6 constants. kA-kE for the size of each loop. kF for the last line in tvar/element in the array. To initialize, I just

Re: Surprise...

Hey Folks, Of course I'm interested in this thread. Always a big concern. Earlier this year, and last year, I was doing face-off competitions between LiveCode versions to test how optimization is faring. When I get time, after some other priorities and addon updates, I would like to do

Re: Surprise...

has always been faster, even with multidimensional arrays... On Mon, August 20, 2018 9:57 pm, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote: > Not really a huge surprise ... access to chunks such as 'item' and > 'line' are (potentially) slow when you are searching relatively large > strings. So t

Re: Surprise...

Not really a huge surprise ... access to chunks such as 'item' and 'line' are (potentially) slow when you are searching relatively large strings. So the archetypal example repeat with i = 1 to N    get line i of tBigString end repeat can get slow if N is large, because of repeatedly scanning

Re: Surprise...

I wrote a stack that demonstrated this and other concepts for LC Mark directly. His Global talks called ‘Optimizing Your Code’ are partially based on some things we have been discussing. Best regards, Mark Talluto livecloud.io nursenotes.net

Re: Surprise...

not loving the sound of all this. has there been any word about the reasons why array access has slowed down as much as it has? On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Hi Malte, > > sounds like something I would normally have

Re: Surprise...

Hi Malte, sounds like something I would normally have jumped on :-) And I don't offhand remember a thread like this started by you - can you give me more of a pointer to when it was or what the subject line(s) were ? Thanks Alex. P.S. please try not to be demotivated by this kind of

Re: Surprise...

Hi jbv, Same boat… And it is not the repeat variant has increased, but array access slowed down (a lot) a while back I was doing benchmarks on this. Thread should still be buried somewhere here. As not many jumped on the problems I faced with array access, I somewhat gave up, which is a

Re: Surprise...

Hi. Not sure the code snippet you supplied is complete. There are no variables "T" or "tVar", and so all your nested repeat loops are just time expenders. In other words, you could have just: repeat 100 That said, it seems that assembling the nonexistent array variable repeatedly is slower

Surprise...

line "get item a of line 1 of tvar...", it is twice faster than with the line "get T[1][a]...". This a surprise to me because I have used arrays for years to speed up things, and AFAIK it takes forever to count items and lines at each repeat iterat

Re: A little surprise with LiveCode and On-Rev

Robert Mann r...@free.fr wrote: have a good day, bonne journée.. et fetes! I wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year :-) Nonetheless, if Livecode could standardize on UTF-8... ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please

A little surprise with LiveCode and On-Rev

Again, some musing with On-Rev ;-) I made a simple blog with my reading notes around the web [mostly in french] http://medard.on-rev.com/lectures/index.irev As for now I am putting together pieces to create one file, a head, a body, and a footer The body itself is made from concatenating html

Re: A little surprise with LiveCode and On-Rev

it also easy to make an ftp editori with livecode that can dialog in UTF 8 with on-rev straight ahead! have a good day, bonne journée.. et fetes! -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/A-little-surprise-with-LiveCode-and-On-Rev-tp3094576p3094891.html Sent from