[squeak-dev] A UTC based implementation of DateAndTime
David T. Lewis
lewis at mail.msen.com
Wed May 28 12:13:56 UTC 2014
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:49:08AM +0200, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> On 25.05.2014, at 19:48, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
>
> > Performance of the UTC based DateAndTime is generally favorable compared to
> > the original. Here is what I see on my system (smaller numbers are better).
> >
> > LXTestDateAndTimePerformance test results using the original Squeak DateAndTime
> > on an interpreter VM:
> > {
> > #testNow->10143 .
> > #testEquals->30986 .
> > #testGreaterThan->80199 .
> > #testLessThan->75912 .
> > #testPrintString->10429 .
> > #testStringAsDateAndTime->44657
> > }
> >
> > LXTestDateAndTimePerformance test results using the new UTC based DateAndTime
> > on an interpreter VM:
> > {
> > #testNow->6423 .
> > #testEquals->31625 .
> > #testGreaterThan->22999 .
> > #testLessThan->18514 .
> > #testPrintString->12502 .
> > #testStringAsDateAndTime->32912
> > }
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> just curious: did you test the performance without the LargeInt primitives?
>
> - Bert -
>
For the new UTC implementation with the primitive disabled, fallback code is
much slower for DateAndTime class>>now.
{
#testNow->36939 .
#testEquals->29015 .
#testGreaterThan->21142 .
#testLessThan->17586 .
#testPrintString->11809 .
#testStringAsDateAndTime->30918
}
Dave
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|