Revolution speed sucks?

yoy yoy at comcast.net
Mon Aug 11 12:45:01 EDT 2003


Brian,

Since I'm the guy who opened this thread I wanted to ask about your speed
comparisons.

Did your revolution script read in and write out to text files as the
PERLotto script does?

If so that may explain the 10% Perl speed advantage. Did you read in and
write out to a field? Did you read the field into a variable and then write
the results back to the field? Did you leave out the textcolor commands out,
etc.?

I modified OmniLotto to read the field into a variable "games" and did all
the calculations there and then spit the variable games into the field
"gamelist" on a line by line basis (with lock screen until done).

To process 100,000 games in Perl took 14 seconds while Revolution took
over10 minutes to process only 10,000 lines.

The more lines in the field, no matter whether the data is manipulated in
the field directly or in an array increases the time to process by some
order of magnitude. At least that's my perception, in this type of data
manipulation. Perl does not.

Would you care to share (and I'm humbled that you took the time to translate
my perl code in the first place) your .rev script with me for inspection? I
would be most curious and "sharing the magic" is never a bad thing, right?
;-)

Regards,

Andy

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian Yennie" <briany at qldlearning.com>
To: <use-revolution at lists.runrev.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2003 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: Revolution speed sucks?


> BTW, I did indeed out of curiosity port the Perl code behind this
> thread almost line-by-line into MetaTalk. The result? No matter how
> hard I tried the Perl code ran at least 10% faster. Not a big
> difference, but the MetaTalk was NOT a clear winner by any means.
>
> That doesn't mean Perl is faster. But on this particular script, it
> seems it's AT LEAST comparable.
>
> Brian




More information about the use-livecode mailing list