Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl Monk, Perl Meditation
 
PerlMonks  

comment on

( #3333=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??
An undefined value is converted to an empty string in string context. So the two are functionally equivalent, even if one is potentially confusing.

The benchmark you wrote is not a good test because the concatenation time will be lost in the overhead for the function call. To some degree, you could argue that means, by definition, that it doesn't matter which you pick; however, if you are going to test, you should test the right thing.

#!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);
which yields
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)
or
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)
or
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)
So I would conclude that skipping the no-op would save me on the order 1 second for every 10 million assignments. Whether this matters for your use case depends on your use case. It would not matter for any of mine.

#11929 First ask yourself `How would I do this without a computer?' Then have the computer do it the same way.


In reply to Re: Typo or on purpose? Variable instantiation with string concatenation operator by kennethk
in thread Typo or on purpose? Variable instantiation with string concatenation operator by capfan

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":



  • Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
    <code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
  • Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
  • Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.
Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others scrutinizing the Monastery: (2)
As of 2022-11-26 09:53 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?
    Notices?