Talk:Word wrap: Difference between revisions

→‎REXX timings: last lastpos
(→‎REXX timings: comment on misspelling. -- ~~~~)
(→‎REXX timings: last lastpos)
Line 352:
 
: I got a 45% improvement (using Regina REXX), you got a 35% improvement (using ooRexx) --- Are my assumptions correct?   How many engines does your laptop have?   How much memory?   What other processes are running?   When I run benchmarks, the computer is running pretty much naked (as possible).   No matter what the improvement (35% or 45%), that's nothing to sneeze at. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 20:29, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 
:: nobody sneezes! --[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 05:24, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 
Unfortunately I cannot verify a similar performance difference with my 1MB file. --[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 19:58, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Line 363 ⟶ 365:
 
: With a one megabyte file, you may be measuring the effects of paging in your laptop (as for elapsed time) as well as competition/interference with other processes.   That was one reason why I used a multiplier for the '''do''' loop instead of increasing the amount of text read.   The drawback is that (the multiplier) increases the locality of reference, and I don't know enough about the Microsoft Windows paging sub-system to know how much of an effect that is. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 20:36, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 
:: Let's leave it at that. I shall be using lastpos in the future. thanks. Nevertheless version 2 seems to be undoubtedly better than !?! --[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 05:24, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
2,289

edits