Be careful of consecutive speed tests. With memory caching and virtual memory, the second process benefits from the first process loading and/or leaving data in memory.
That may invalidate your victory if the second test won. My 1 cent. P.S. The GOTO Holy war will never end until it's removed from the compiler and that ain't gonna happen. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Allen E. Elwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 12:36 PM Subject: RE: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT > Hi Karl, > > Thank you for asking that question, 'cause funny as it sounds I never > thought to do a speed test on this construct. > > I didn't include the delete statement because what you really wanted to test > was the LOOP/REPEAT vs. the GO construct. Guess what? After doing four > consecutive runs and picking the fastest of each four, LOOP/REPEAT > wins!!!!!! LOOP/REPEAT came out at 15.9 Million loops per second while GOTO > came out at 14.3 MLPS. This running on a 2.6ghz P4 w2000 install of Unidata > PE. > > (Notice I also prefer the EXIT statement in environments that have it) > > I actually thought that the GOTO would win, but it appears that the P-code > processor has been optimized to work faster with loop constructs. > > So does this end the GOTO holy war? > Less Filling, Tastes Better, Goes Faster??? > ;-) > > SPEEDTEST.GOTO > How long in seconds? ?10 > 14369777 total loops > 1436977.7 per second > PC: > > SPEEDTEST > How long in seconds? ?10 > 15921613 total loops > 1592161.3 per second > PC: > > * Release > * CUSTOM > * SPEEDTEST - does what it sounds like > PRINT 'How long in seconds? ':;INPUT HL > START = TIME() > ENDING = START + HL > COUNTER = 0 > LOOP > COUNTER += 1 > IF TIME() GE ENDING THEN EXIT > REPEAT > PRINT COUNTER:' total loops' > PRINT COUNTER/HL:' per second' > STOP > > * Release > * CUSTOM > * SPEEDTEST.GOTO - does what it sounds like > PRINT 'How long in seconds? ':;INPUT HL > START = TIME() > ENDING = START + HL > COUNTER = 0 > 10 > COUNTER += 1 > IF TIME() GE ENDING THEN GOTO 20 > GOTO 10 > 20 > PRINT COUNTER:' total loops' > PRINT COUNTER/HL:' per second' > STOP > > Allen E. Elwood > Senior Programmer Analyst > Sysmark Information Systems, Inc. > Direct (818) 361-5251 > Fax (818) 361-5251 > Cell (818) 359-8162 > Home (818) 361-7217 > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 07:33 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [U2] LOOP or GOTO on READNEXT > > > I've seen 2 ways to read a client key, change the length to 6 digits, then > write it back out, delete the old one and move on: > > EXAMPLE 1 of 2: > !(FIXEMPNO) - Fix the employee number length > open '','CUSTEMP' to CF else stopm 'Not' > select CF > 10: readnext K else stop > read REC from CF,K then > NK = fmt(K,"R%6") > write REC on CF,NK > delete CF,K > end > go 10 > end > > EXAMPLE 2 of 2: > !(FIXEMPNO) - Fix the employee number length > DONE = 0 > open '','CUSTEMP' to CF else stopm 'Not' > select CF > loop > readnext K else DONE = 1 > read REC from CF,K then > NK = fmt(K,"R%6") > write REC on CF,NK > delete CF,K > end > repeat > end > > My intent is not to start a religious discussion about GO or GOTOs because > I see that method all over the place and regardless of why, who or > whatever, my question is, which is faster. (I prefer using loop..repeat > syntax, FWIW). > > -- > Karl L. Pearson > Director of IT, > ATS Industrial Supply > Direct: 801-978-4429 > Toll-free: 800-789-9300 1,29 > Fax: 801-972-3888 > http://www.atsindustrial.com > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ------- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ > ------- > u2-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
