Re: 2.4 Official -- memory stuff
Pete Lomax wrote:
> I just tried this on 2.4 and compared it with 2.3 on the same kit.
> I found that it works fine on 2.3 but not 2.4, and also that it
> appears to be ok using ex rather than exw in both 2.3 and 2.4.
> Dunno if that helps.
Euphoria 2.4 for Windows uses the system heap manager.
Euphoria 2.3 for Windows uses Watcom's heap manager (malloc/free).
This change was made to properly support
Euphoria-written .dlls. No changes were made in heap management
for DOS, Linux or FreeBSD. I know that in some
cases the new system heap manager is much faster than Watcom.
The Watcom algorithm, as I understand it, is slower at
allocating (possibly *much slower*), but faster at deallocating.
Today I tried a modified version of allsorts.ex to
sort sequences of various lengths up to several million
integers, or a few million floating-point numbers, using
my old 64Mb ME machine. I tested all the reasonably-fast
sorting algorithms with Euphoria 2.3 and 2.4.
In most cases the timing differences were small, but overall
2.4 was somewhat faster. Most of the fast algorithms
use recursive "divide and conquer" methods that
involve allocating and freeing numerous sequences
of various sizes.
I'll be interested to see Andy Serpa's latest program
so I can compare it to his earlier one. Maybe there's
a common ingredient that bogs down ME's heap manager.
XP (with the same memory) is fine.
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
