#!perl

use strict;
use warnings;
use Benchmark;

my $s1 .= 'Peter geht nach Hause geht';
my $s2 = 'Peter nach Hause geht';


## Method number one - a numeric sort
sub test_concat {
    my $string = shift;
    my $s1x;
    for (1 .. 100000) {
        $s1x .= $string;
        undef $s1x;
    }
    return $s1x;
}

## Method number two - an alphabetic sort
sub test_normal {
    my $string = shift;
    my $s1x;
    for (1 .. 100000) {
        $s1x = $string;
        undef $s1x;
    }
    return $s1x;
}

## We'll test each one, with simple labels
my $count = 100;
timethese (
    $count,
    {
        'Method One' => sub{ test_concat($s1); },
        'Method Two' => sub{ test_normal($s1); },
    }
);

exit(0);

##</code><code>##

Benchmark: timing 100 iterations of Method One, Method Two...
Method One:  4 wallclock secs ( 3.40 usr +  0.00 sys =  3.40 CPU) @ 29.40/s (n=100)
Method Two:  3 wallclock secs ( 3.59 usr +  0.00 sys =  3.59 CPU) @ 27.87/s (n=100)

##</code><code>##

Benchmark: timing 100 iterations of Method One, Method Two...
Method One:  3 wallclock secs ( 3.37 usr +  0.00 sys =  3.37 CPU) @ 29.68/s (n=100)
Method Two:  4 wallclock secs ( 3.49 usr +  0.00 sys =  3.49 CPU) @ 28.61/s (n=100)

##</code><code>##

Benchmark: timing 100 iterations of Method One, Method Two...
Method One:  4 wallclock secs ( 3.45 usr +  0.00 sys =  3.45 CPU) @ 29.00/s (n=100)
Method Two:  3 wallclock secs ( 3.49 usr +  0.00 sys =  3.49 CPU) @ 28.62/s (n=100)