Re: Re: Micro optimisations can pay off, and needn't be a maintenance problem

As I read it, 25% optimization of a single item, said item being called a quarter of a million times for the timed operation. If it was a 100 second improvement in performance overall, that would amount to a .0004-second improvement in attribute access (multiplied over accessing them 250K times). Or do I oversimplify?

Comment on Re: Re: Micro optimisations can pay off, and needn't be a maintenance problem

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Micro optimisations can pay off, and needn't be a maintenance problem by Abigail-II (Bishop) on Nov 13, 2002 at 09:52 UTC
Yeah, and? It doesn't explain at all how a 25% optimization of a single item results in a 6 time speed up overall. Abigail	[reply]
Re: Re: Micro optimisations can pay off, and needn't be a maintenance problem by pilgrim (Monk) on Nov 13, 2002 at 19:40 UTC
So the issue is either that the .0004 second improvement in the operation represents more than a 25% optimization (since an actual 25% optimization should result in a linear speed gain), or that the optimization of a single item somehow resulted in a non-linear performance improvement. That, I can't help you with; perhaps dws is onto something. I couldn't run the benchmark and haven't the time to tweak it and break out "get" versus "set", at the moment. (Nor have I the time to speculate on why it might not be a linear improvement.) Apparently, I've got just enough time to be no help at all. At least my keen grasp of the obvious is intact.	[reply]