Re^2: Battle Royal Grep vs For

Your point is taken, so I reran the tests and got this,

              Rate grep_loop  for_loop
grep_loop 150375/s        --      -22%
for_loop  193618/s       29%        --
[download]

So now they are both faster, but grep is still slower. Than the for loop

Comment on Re^2: Battle Royal Grep vs For Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Battle Royal Grep vs For by Fletch (Bishop) on Mar 19, 2008 at 17:54 UTC
And as usual `grep EXPR, LIST` that everyone forgets about wins the race. `#!/usr/bin/perl use strict; use warnings; my @values = qw(test test1 test2 test3); use Benchmark qw( cmpthese ); cmpthese -2, { for_loop => sub { my @matches; for (@values) { push @matches, $_ +if $_ =~ /test/ }; }, grep_loop => sub { my @matches = grep { $_ =~ /test/ } @values; + }, grep_expr => sub { my @matches = grep $_ =~ /test/, @values + }, }; __END__ Rate grep_loop for_loop grep_expr grep_loop 248507/s -- -27% -46% for_loop 338839/s 36% -- -27% grep_expr 461521/s 86% 36% --` [download] You owe the oracle a Battle Royale With Cheese and a tasty drink to wash it down with. The cake is a lie. The cake is a lie. The cake is a lie.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Battle Royal Grep vs For by Herkum (Parson) on Mar 19, 2008 at 18:01 UTC
I had always gotten into the habit of using {} with grep, that I did not think about dropping them. This was one of the reasons I started this thread, was to gain some insight and learn a new approaches to make improvements to my code. That was very useful bit of information, thanks!	[reply]