On Wed, 19 Jun 2002, Daniel A. Koepke wrote:
>On Thu, 20 Jun 2002, Dante Mavec wrote:
>
>> Firstly, does the second actually use more juice?
>
>Yes, the switch statement is faster.
The 'switch' version is slower, but ...
>> Secondly, if it does, is it an appreciable amount?
>
>No. There will not be any noticeable difference between the performance
>of the two versions.
what Daniel says here is correct. You'll never notice it in practice.
100,000 loops for saving throws.
1,000,000 loops for THAC0 and experience.
-----------------------------------------
switch: Saving throws: 22.446296 seconds.
equatn: Saving throws: 1.887142 seconds.
table : Saving throws: 1.514616 seconds.
switch: THAC0: 32.097520 seconds.
equatn: THAC0: 3.241892 seconds.
table : THAC0: 1.234327 seconds.
switch: Experience: 37.086464 seconds.
equatn: Experience: 4.238704 seconds.
table : Experience: 1.304827 seconds.
NOTE: 'table' is "best case" because of the way my trivial
benchmark ran the loops. The worst case is equal to or
slower than the silly equations I made up.
So .00022446 seconds per switch saving throw. You save a whole .00020559
seconds by using an equation over the switch. The only place you ever
might get a (minuscule) measurable difference is the "levels" command.
I'd use an equation if we had one with a perfect regression.
--
George Greer
greerga@circlemud.org
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| FAQ: http://qsilver.queensu.ca/~fletchra/Circle/list-faq.html |
| Archives: http://post.queensu.ca/listserv/wwwarch/circle.html |
| Newbie List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/circle-newbies/ |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 06/25/03 PDT