And the results:#!/usr/local/bin/perl -w use Benchmark; @long = ('a' x 100, 45); @short = ('a' x 10, 7); timethese( -10, { L_ariels => sub { ariels(@long) }, L_merlyn => sub { merlyn(@long) }, L_nashdj => sub { nashdj(@long) }, S_ariels => sub { ariels(@short) }, S_merlyn => sub { merlyn(@short) }, S_nashdj => sub { nashdj(@short) }, } ); sub ariels { my ($str, $rot) = @_; scalar reverse ((reverse substr($str,0,$rot)) . (reverse substr($str,$rot)) ); } sub merlyn { my ($str, $rot) = @_; substr($str,$rot) . substr($str, 0, $rot); } sub nashdj { my ($str, $rot) = @_; $str =~ s/(.{$rot})(.*)/$2$1/s; $str; }
Benchmark: running L_ariels, L_merlyn, L_nashdj, S_ariels, S_merlyn, S_nashdj, each for at least 10 CPU seconds... L_ariels: 13 wallclock secs ( 9.97 usr + 0.04 sys = 10.01 CPU) @ 71186.51/s (n=712577) L_merlyn: 10 wallclock secs ( 9.95 usr + 0.06 sys = 10.01 CPU) @ 92000.70/s (n=920927) L_nashdj: 12 wallclock secs ( 9.95 usr + 0.06 sys = 10.01 CPU) @ 25479.52/s (n=255050) S_ariels: 11 wallclock secs ( 9.99 usr + 0.07 sys = 10.06 CPU) @ 89239.76/s (n=897752) S_merlyn: 13 wallclock secs ( 9.95 usr + 0.05 sys = 10.00 CPU) @ 100328.30/s (n=1003283) S_nashdj: 10 wallclock secs (10.27 usr + 0.10 sys = 10.37 CPU) @ 28213.11/s (n=292570)So, using substr is in fact quite a bit faster than using a regex. I think this is not surprising: the substitution being done is too simple to make the overhead of the regex engine worthwhile.
In reply to Re: Re: Rotating a string
by chipmunk
in thread Rotating a string
by ariels
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |