U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Re: String::Cat optimization [message #34586 is a reply to message #34585]

Thu, 01 December 2011 08:04

mirek
Messages: 13984
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

koldo wrote on Thu, 01 December 2011 00:18

More cases

There is a slight improvement in MSC but a big one in MinGW.

MSC10 Speed
- Standard
TIMING Cat 40         :  2.34 s  - 233.71 ns ( 2.56 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         : 839.12 ms - 83.91 ns ( 1.06 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
- Experimental
TIMING Cat 40         :  2.24 s  - 223.96 ns ( 2.44 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         : 788.63 ms - 78.86 ns (987.00 ms / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000

MSC10 Optimal
- Standard
TIMING Cat 40         :  2.37 s  - 237.30 ns ( 2.57 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         : 857.95 ms - 85.80 ns ( 1.05 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
- Experimental
TIMING Cat 40         :  2.27 s  - 226.80 ns ( 2.48 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         : 893.96 ms - 89.40 ns ( 1.10 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000

MSC9 Speed
- Standard
TIMING Cat 40         :  2.38 s  - 238.20 ns ( 2.61 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         : 884.96 ms - 88.50 ns ( 1.12 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  5.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
- Experimental
TIMING Cat 40         :  2.13 s  - 212.92 ns ( 2.34 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         : 866.17 ms - 86.62 ns ( 1.07 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000

MSC9 Optimal
- Standard
TIMING Cat 40         :  3.04 s  - 304.05 ns ( 3.24 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         :  1.04 s  - 103.95 ns ( 1.24 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
- Experimental
TIMING Cat 40         :  2.48 s  - 248.49 ns ( 2.67 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         : 915.92 ms - 91.59 ns ( 1.10 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000

MINGW 4.5.2 Speed
- Standard
TIMING Cat 40         :  5.59 s  - 558.74 ns ( 5.85 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         :  1.89 s  - 189.04 ns ( 2.15 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
- Experimental
TIMING Cat 40         :  2.91 s  - 290.74 ns ( 3.18 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         : 853.43 ms - 85.34 ns ( 1.13 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000

MINGW 4.5.2 Optimal
- Standard
TIMING Cat 40         :  5.54 s  - 554.21 ns ( 5.84 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         :  1.81 s  - 180.81 ns ( 2.11 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  2.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000

- Experimental
TIMING Cat 40         :  2.84 s  - 284.44 ns ( 3.14 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000
TIMING Cat 18         : 824.40 ms - 82.44 ns ( 1.12 s  / 10000000 ), min:  0.00 ns, max:  1.00 ms, nesting: 1 - 10000000

Well, I guess this sort of vindicates the optimization...

Mirek

Report message to a moderator