Difference between revisions of "Efficiency Tester"
m (to integer max from float max, and print it as part of the result) |
(guess the inaccuracy is +-1ms since that's more than I saw, first time I tried measuring the cost of no code for 1000 (not 10,000) times) |
||
Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
// always measure how small, not only how fast | // always measure how small, not only how fast | ||
llOwnerSay((string) llGetFreeMemory()); | llOwnerSay((string) llGetFreeMemory() + " free bytes of code at default.state_entry"); | ||
// always take more than one measurement | // always take more than one measurement | ||
Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
float elapsed = ((t1 - t0) - (t2 - t1))/max; | float elapsed = ((t1 - t0) - (t2 - t1))/max; | ||
llOwnerSay((string) elapsed + "+- | llOwnerSay((string) elapsed + "+-1 milliseconds passed on average in each of"); | ||
llOwnerSay((string) max + " trials of running the code in the loop"); | llOwnerSay((string) max + " trials of running the code in the loop"); | ||
} | } |
Revision as of 04:48, 18 October 2007
LSL Portal | Functions | Events | Types | Operators | Constants | Flow Control | Script Library | Categorized Library | Tutorials |
Q1: Want to see how small some code is?
A: Add three copies of your code to a script, call llGetFreeMemory to count free space, and start deleting copies. After deleting each copy, you should see a consistent savings in free space, i.e, the code space cost of your code.
Q2: Want to see how fast some code is?
A: Run your code inside code like this example to call your code time and again to measure the consequent change in llGetTimestamp.
// IMPORTANT: // Only perform tests in an empty region. // To reduce contamination and be sure to wearing no attachments. // Preferably do tests in a private sim with one on it. // Don't move while performing the test. // There is a margin of error so run the tests multiple times to determine it. integer time() { // count milliseconds since the day began string stamp = llGetTimestamp(); // "YYYY-MM-DDThh:mm:ss.ff..fZ" return (integer) llGetSubString(stamp, 11, 12) * 3600000 + // hh (integer) llGetSubString(stamp, 14, 15) * 60000 + // mm llRound((float)llGetSubString(stamp, 17, -2) * 1000000.0)/1000; // ss.ff..f } default { state_entry() { // always measure how small, not only how fast llOwnerSay((string) llGetFreeMemory() + " free bytes of code at default.state_entry"); // always take more than one measurement integer repeateds; for (repeateds = 0; repeateds < 3; ++repeateds) { // declare test variables float counter; // declare framework variables float i = 0; float j = 0; integer max = 10000; // 2ms of work takes 20 seconds to repeat 10,000 times, plus overhead // begin float t0 = time(); // loop to measure elapsed time to run sample code do { // test once or more counter += 1; } while (++i < max); float t1 = time(); // loop to measure elapsed time to run no code do ; while (++j < max); float t2 = time(); // report average time elapsed per run float elapsed = ((t1 - t0) - (t2 - t1))/max; llOwnerSay((string) elapsed + "+-1 milliseconds passed on average in each of"); llOwnerSay((string) max + " trials of running the code in the loop"); } } }
Launched by Xaviar Czervik, then modified by Strife Onizuka, then further edited as the history of this article shows.
Try the empty test of deleting the { counter += 1; } source line to see the astonishing inaccuracy of this instrument. The time cost of no code, as measured here, isn't always zero!
See the LSL Script Efficiency article for a less brief discussion. Please understand, we don't mean to be arguing for many different ways to measure the costs of code. Here we do mean to be building a consensus on best practices, in one considerately short article constructed from a neutral point of view.