David, The >HELP BASIC CALL help info explains how the CALL and CALL@ work. The variable setting should be included in the loop as it is a valid part of the CALL@ setup. Setting the variable will 'trigger' the CALL@ to find the program again. It is more of a real-life situation than setting the variable out of the loop.
Nevertheless, it is interesting results, as CALL@ used to be rather slow. But debugging will be very stressful with [EMAIL PROTECTED] As a side note, I am finding similar zero-speed differences between dynamic and static array usages in large array's. The internals of U2 must be getting more interesting... Cheers, David Murray -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Wolverton Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 1:50 PM To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Subject: RE: [U2] [UD] CALL @progname Actually - I just ran a test, and was surprised somewhat: 1,000,000 Iterations of ways to do a call... CALL PROGNAME (direct) 7047 CALL *PROGNAME (global) 7766 CALL @PROGNAME (indirect) 6984 GOSUB (logic contained in-line) 1531 Call as Function 10203 I've rearranged the order the routines are called in, and run the test suite over and over... The Indirect calls are CLEARLY faster, with all numbers moving +/- 50, EXCEPT the indirect, which only moved +/- 25 or so. Note that I set the @PROGNAME outside of the "call" loop - this was not testing how fast the system could set variables - just the difference on the 'calls'. If I include the setting of the name WITHIN the loop, the indirect call went to 7290 or so -- the difference in the 'direct' call vs the 'indirect' call efficiency appears to be in the Variable handling! But both are still faster than use of Global catalogs. Anyone have a clue why the indirects are a hair faster? Or am I just getting lucky over and over? I always thought they were slower as well! DW > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Murray > Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 11:32 AM > To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Subject: RE: [U2] [UD] CALL @progname > > David, > > @CALL's are very inefficient and slow. It would be worth > doing a speed test.> ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
