[Pharo-users] [ANN] ZTimestamp
pdebruic at gmail.com
Fri Jun 22 18:14:37 EDT 2012
Yes I agree there's a need for speed. I think ZnTimestamp is a valuable addition.
And maybe the primitive that returns ms since epoch and offset gets adopted so DateAndTime can be nearly as fast.
On Jun 22, 2012, at 2:51 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven at beta9.be> wrote:
> On 22 Jun 2012, at 22:23, Paul DeBruicker wrote:
>> On 06/22/2012 01:11 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>>>> Here are some benchmarks:
>>>>> [ 1000 timesRepeat: [ ZTimestamp now ] ] bench '1,910 per second.'
>>>>> [ 1000 timesRepeat: [ DateAndTime now ] ] bench '253 per second.'
>>> what? 253 per second? what it doing there?
>> 253 iterations of 1000 timesRepeat:[DateAndTime now] per second.
>> So ~253,000 iterations of DateAndTime now per second.
>> [DateAndTime now] bench
> Yes, depending on the use case one can discuss about the absolute numbers.
> But consider a LRU style cache where on each operation the timestamp is updated to now, you'll want speed, right ?
More information about the Pharo-users