Re: Oh, well, looks like atoms are not possible
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Oh, well, looks like atoms are not possible
- From: Chris Marrin <chris@...>
- Date: 2005年5月17日 13:53:53 -0700
Rici Lake wrote:
...
I did 3 tests. I loaded the strings, got back their char* pointers,
then put them into the registry and popped them. Then I forced a GC
and loaded the strings in the registry onto the stack and checked
their addresses. They matched. Then I loaded those same strings again
with new pushstring() calls, and they matched. Then I executed these
two functions, in turn:
function _getabc()
return "abc"
end
function _getlongString()
return "AVeryVeryVeryVeryVeryVeryLongString"
end
Looking at the returned string values, the first one matched and the
second one didn't.
As far as I know, that can only mean that either the long string got
gc'd somewhere along the way, or that you mistyped it in the
_getlongString function.
OK, thanks for making me go back to look. It was a stupid coding error
on my part! They are all the same. So that's great. Now I've done a
timing test between pushstring and rawgeti to push a string. I also
tested pushlstring() to factor out the strlen() operation. I did 10
million iterations of pushstring(), pushlstring(), and rawgeti(). The
results are:
short string long string
------------ -----------
pushstring() 2.9 sec 4.1 sec
pushlstring() 2.2 sec 3.3 sec
rawgeti() 3.1 sec 3.1 sec
So, hashing short strings that already exist is faster than rawgeti()!
Since I expect most property strings to be shorter than 35 chars, I
won't bother with doing rawgeti(). But I will still make an Atom class
which will cache strings and their lengths and then allow those strings
to pushed and compared.
I tried hacking this up in my app and saw a 50% improvement in performance!
Anyway, I can post the results if anyone is interested.
Thanks for the help...
--
chris marrin ,"",ドル
chris@marrin.com b` $ ,,.
mP b' , 1$'
,.` ,b` ,` :$$'
,|` mP ,` ,mm
,b" b" ,` ,mm m$$ ,m ,`P$$
m$` ,b` .` ,mm ,'|$P ,|"1$` ,b$P ,` :1ドル
b$` ,$: :,`` |$$ ,` $$` ,|` ,$,,ドル`"$$ .` :$|
b$| _m$`,:` :1ドル ,` ,$Pm|` ` :$,ドル..;"' |$:
P$b, _;b$$b1ドル" |$$ ,` ,$$" ``' $$
```"```'" `"` `""` ""` ,P`
"As a general rule,don't solve puzzles that open portals to Hell"'
- References:
- C api changing values, mark joselli
- Re: C api changing values, Asko Kauppi
- Lua strings as "atoms"???, Chris Marrin
- Re: Lua strings as "atoms"???, Ben Sunshine-Hill
- Re: Lua strings as "atoms"???, Chris Marrin
- Re: Lua strings as "atoms"???, Rici Lake
- Re: Lua strings as "atoms"???, Chris Marrin
- Re: Lua strings as "atoms"???, Rici Lake
- Re: Lua strings as "atoms"???, Chris Marrin
- Oh, well, looks like atoms are not possible, Chris Marrin
- Re: Oh, well, looks like atoms are not possible, Rici Lake