Author: David Dory
Date: 01:55:19 02/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
>David Rasmussen wrote: >I don't know what Windows you are talking about (and this is also dependant on >the compiler, actually much more than the OS), but with gcc and MSVC on Windows >2000, clock() has a pretty high resolution, and is pretty consistent. If I do >something like the above, I get consistent results. If you're testing the >difference between to different ways of doing the same thing, and you loop >enough times, you will get an ok picture of which is faster, and by how much. His post showed he was comparing the speed of two functions, using two different methods of measuring that speed. My opinion is that he should compare both functions using ONE measuring method, rather than using TWO methods. To make the test as valid as possible, all other variables should be eliminated (in this case, the variable of the second time measuring method). Testing for ONE variable at a time, is the ONLY way to go. When you inadvertently add a second variable to the test - well. You can NOW > >But of course I use a profiler for complex problems. After all, clock() isn't >guaranteed by ANSI C to have a resolution higher than 1 second even. MSVC 6 states that clock() has a resolution of 1/1000ths of a second. But you can't believe that, in my opinion, if the OS is Windows. Any Windows OS, (and the older 16-bit'ers are certainly worse), can give you slightly different times for the exact same task, in my experience, with clumping. The compiler used is irrelevant. For instance, say you time your task at 4.327 seconds. Repeating the exact same task may give you a sampling of: 4.324, 4.327, 4.330, etc. What I haven't seen are results like: 4.326, 4.327, 4.328. The results are not perfectly the same, nor are they perfectly granular - they're "CLUMPY" <grin>, for lack of a better word. Sorry, I don't have 7, and know nada about it. Dave > >BTW. MSVC 7 (which is in beta), doesn't have a profiler. They threw it out from >MSVC 6, because they believed that it wasn't good enough, and that there were >many good third party options. But which? Is there a free profiler for MSVC >available? I use the profiler for gcc sometimes, but since this code is usually >being compiled with MSVC, a gcc profile isn't exactly precise. > >/David
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.