OpenEuphoria

[Attn] Robert: Faster sequence operations in Eu 1.x ?

• Posted by Vincent <darkvincentdude at yahoo.com> Dec 15, 2005
• 604 views

OK so I got bored and found Euphoria v1.2 online and decided to take it out for
a "spin". When I found the Sequence.ex benchmark program, I though cool lets see
how much faster Euphoria v2.5 is with sequence operations...

Is it my imagination or is v1.2 faster than v2.5 at various sequence operations?

================================================================

Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

C:\Documents and Settings\Vincent>ex
Euphoria Interpreter 2.5 for 32-bit DOS.
Copyright (c) Rapid Deployment Software 2005
Permission is freely granted to anyone to copy and
redistribute this Public Domain Edition of Euphoria.

file name to execute? C:\Documents and
Settings\Vincent\Desktop\EUPHOR12\sequence

                Euphoria Sequence Benchmarks

* Initializing a length-100 sequence ---> 1411200 initializations per second

* Adding two length-100 sequences ---> 599867 sequence-adds per second

* Appending to a sequence ---> 17350498 appends per second

* Slicing a sequence ---> 7585548 slices per second

* Name look-up ---> 1164784 look-ups per second

================================================================

C:\Documents and Settings\Vincent\Desktop\EUPHOR12>ex
Euphoria 1.2 Public Domain Edition
(c) 1994 Rapid Deployment Software
Permission is freely granted to anyone to copy and
redistribute this Public Domain Edition of Euphoria.

file name to execute? sequence

                Euphoria Sequence Benchmarks

* Initializing a length-100 sequence ---> 3921466 initializations per second

* Adding two length-100 sequences ---> 1137234 sequence-adds per second

* Appending to a sequence ---> 24140000 appends per second

* Slicing a sequence ---> 14280730 slices per second

* Name look-up ---> 2277740 look-ups per second

================================================================

Robert please tell me that there is a logical explaination for this. Is a
smaller number per second better?


Vincent