Re: Re: Re: Re: Array sort

Wouldn't this eliminate more of the overhead?

my ($min, $min_i) = ($array[0]->[2], 0);

foreach my $i (1..$#array) {

  ($min, $min_i) = ($array[$i]->[2], $i) if $array[$i]->[2] < $min;
}
[download]

Comment on Re: Re: Re: Re: Array sort - kind of... Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re: x 5 Array sort - kind of... (benchmark)
by demerphq (Chancellor) on Feb 05, 2002 at 10:25 UTC

I have to admit that I was suprised to discover that the list assignment is so much faster than an array lookup (which obviously is why yours is faster). Somthing I shall keep in mind for the future.

Heres my benchmarks...

Benchmark: running demerphq, petral, petral_modifier, each for at leas
+t 60 CPU seconds...
  demerphq: 66 wallclock secs (62.98 usr +  0.00 sys = 62.98 CPU) @ 21
+2.26/s (n=13369)
    petral: 64 wallclock secs (62.99 usr +  0.00 sys = 62.99 CPU) @ 26
+7.17/s (n=16828)
petral_modifier: 64 wallclock secs (63.17 usr +  0.00 sys = 63.17 CPU)
+ @ 274.43/s (n=17336)
                 Rate        demerphq          petral petral_modifier
demerphq        212/s              --            -21%            -23%
petral          267/s             26%              --             -3%
petral_modifier 274/s             29%              3%              --
[download]

Yves / DeMerphq
--
When to use Prototypes?

[reply]
[d/l]


Problems? Is your data what you think it is?
	PerlMonks

Re: Re: Re: Re: Array sort - kind of...