Release 6.7.10 RC 1 / 7.1.3 RC 1

[Richard Gaskin]

Good work - results more or less confirmed here.

Might be good to submit that script with an enhancement request in the 
bug DB to see if those use cases can be optimized.  Previous requests 
with other commands and functions yielded good opportunities for speed 
boosts, bringing v8 much closer to v6.  Whether the same can be done 
with the language features used here is something I don't know, but once 
in the queue the team can review and advise.

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com                http://www.FourthWorld.com

-hh wrote:
>> > hh wrote:
>> > Will not work with LC 8 for a while, LC 6.7.10 is in average 16 times
>> > faster here. And in average 10 times faster than LC 7.
>>
>> FourthWorld wrote:
>> My own test are showing v8 rather close for v6 in performance, and much
>> faster than 7. What script(s) are you running which get those results?
>
> Let's take a simple example that was recently here in the list.
> For your comfort the script is attached below.
>
> It is also a field, where LC 8 is said to be already optimized.
> Correct me if I'm wrong.
>
> Here are my results from a medium fast machine (Mac mini, i5-2.5GHz)
> Task (=1 x mouseUp): 100 repeats of find the minimum of 1000 integers
>
> Version: replaceText - replace - min() - sort
> 6.7.10-rc1: 0.30 - 0.07 - 0.06 - 0.21 (worst timing of 10 x mouseUp)
> 7.1.3 -rc1: 1.78 - 4.43 - 1.38 - 0.95 (best  timing of 10 x mouseUp)
> 8.0.0-dp15: 1.94 - 4.69 - 1.49 - 0.94 (best  timing of 10 x mouseUp)
>
> So the time needed is in relation
> for the "LC-given" min()
> ... LC 6: LC 7: LC 8 = 1:23:25
> and better for the sort
> ... LC 6: LC 7: LC 8 = 1:5:5
> taking the best of each row
> ... LC 6: LC 7: LC 8 = 1:16:16
>
> Better don't force me to publish the results of animating large polygons.
> *** I left these timings out in averaging in order to acknowledge that
> *** LC 8 is still in alpha.
>
> I like LC 8 very much and I live with the speed loss I have when I use it
> (it's worth for me, if I do so). The speed loss is not the culprit of the
> dev team, it's the big bundle of shiny new things we wish to have ...
>
> The script used
> (by Thierry, slightly modified and expanded by me)
> ============================
> on mouseUp
>   repeat with i=1 to 1000
>     get random( 1000)
>     put IT & cr after LinesOfNumbers
>     put IT & comma after OneLineOfNumbers
>     put IT into b[i]
>   end repeat
>   delete last char of LinesOfNumbers
>   delete last char of OneLineOfNumbers
>   put 100 into nRepeat
>   put the milliseconds into _ct
>   -- case 1
>   repeat nRepeat
>     put min( replaceText( LinesOfNumbers, return,comma)) into min1
>   end repeat
>   put (the milliseconds - _ct)  / nRepeat into timing1
>   wait 1 ticks with messages
>   put the milliseconds into _ct
>   -- case 2
>   repeat nRepeat
>     put LinesOfNumbers into nn
>     replace return with comma in nn
>     put min(nn) into min2
>   end repeat
>   put (the milliseconds - _ct)  / nRepeat into timing2
>   wait 1 ticks with messages
>   put the milliseconds into _ct
>   -- case 3
>   repeat nRepeat
>     put min( OneLineOfNumbers) into min3
>   end repeat
>   put (the milliseconds - _ct)  / nRepeat into timing3
>   wait 1 ticks with messages
>   put the milliseconds into _ct
>   -- case 4
>   repeat nRepeat
>     put LinesOfNumbers into nn
>     sort nn numeric
>     put line 1 of nn into min4
>   end repeat
>   put (the milliseconds - _ct)  / nRepeat into timing4
>   put cr & the version &": "& \
>       format( "%.2f - %.2f -  %.2f -  %.2f %s %s %s", \
>                timing1, timing2, timing3, timing4, min1 is min3, \
>                min2 is min3, min4 is min3) after fld 1
> end mouseUp