sketchucation logo sketchucation
    • Login
    ℹ️ Licensed Extensions | FredoBatch, ElevationProfile, FredoSketch, LayOps, MatSim and Pic2Shape will require license from Sept 1st More Info

    Optimization Tips

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Developers' Forum
    110 Posts 22 Posters 168.8k Views 22 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • Dan RathbunD Offline
      Dan Rathbun
      last edited by

      Ruby is a 100% Object-Oriented Interpreted Scripting Language.

      See: "Ruby Newbie's Guide to Getting Started"

      I'm not here much anymore.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • Dan RathbunD Offline
        Dan Rathbun
        last edited by

        @unknownuser said:

        does the whole line have to be in c? im trying to map this out---

        If you are new to Ruby... learn Ruby scripting, don't worry about it's C source code, you'll just confuse yourself. (The Ruby interpreter engine just happens to be written in C and compiled. You don't need to know C unless your involved with actually maintaining / updating the Ruby Core libraries. This has noting to do with using Ruby or writing Ruby scripts, or using Sketchup.)

        I'm not here much anymore.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • thomthomT Offline
          thomthom
          last edited by

          i += 1 vs i = i.next

          i=0; t=Time.now; 10000000.times { i+=1 }; Time.now-t
          2.045

          i=0; t=Time.now; 10000000.times { i=i.next }; Time.now-t
          1.682

          Thomas Thomassen — SketchUp Monkey & Coding addict
          List of my plugins and link to the CookieWare fund

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • TIGT Offline
            TIG Moderator
            last edited by

            @thomthom said:

            i += 1 vs i = i.next
            i=0; t=Time.now; 10000000.times { i+=1 }; Time.now-t
            2.045
            i=0; t=Time.now; 10000000.times { i=i.next }; Time.now-t
            1.682

            So avoid i='0'; t=Time.now; 10000000.times { i.next! }; Time.now-t
            ~8.300 😒

            TIG

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • thomthomT Offline
              thomthom
              last edited by

              @thomthom said:

              That would mean it's not the each loop itself that's slow - but the creation of variables.

              range = (0..10000000)

              t=Time.now; range.each { |i| x = i + 1 }; Time.now-t
              3.402

              t=Time.now; x=0; range.each { |i| x = i + 1 }; Time.now-t
              2.848

              t=Time.now; x=0; i=0; range.each { |i| x = i + 1 }; Time.now-t
              2.39

              t=Time.now; for j in range; y = j + 1; end; Time.now-t
              2.196

              t=Time.now; y=0; for j in range; y = j + 1; end; Time.now-t
              2.186

              If one has to use blocks, init the variables you use inside the block first.

              Thomas Thomassen — SketchUp Monkey & Coding addict
              List of my plugins and link to the CookieWare fund

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • D Offline
                dany67300
                last edited by

                I have read all you optimisation tips and tried them, but nothing seems to change the speed creation of my objects. I'm using Sketchup 8 to create dominos described by a picture. To create the dominos, I tried the add_face method and the fill_from_mesh, but the times are exactly the same. It takes me about 2 s to create 400 pieces, and it's growing exponentially. With 600 pieces -> 7s, 1200 pcs -> 50s...
                Is it normal to take so much time ? Each domino is created in his own group for the moment, but it doesn't change if I create them directly in my scene.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • TIGT Offline
                  TIG Moderator
                  last edited by

                  @dany67300 said:

                  I have read all you optimization tips and tried them, but nothing seems to change the speed creation of my objects. I'm using Sketchup 8 to create dominoes described by a picture. To create the dominoes, I tried the add_face method and the fill_from_mesh, but the times are exactly the same. It takes me about 2 s to create 400 pieces, and it's growing exponentially. With 600 pieces -> 7s, 1200 pces -> 50s...
                  Is it normal to take so much time ? Each domino is created in his own group for the moment, but it doesn't change if I create them directly in my scene.

                  Since all dominoes are fixed by there number pattern, why not make the set as separate SKPs with common origins.
                  Then load them into the model when you run the script - no need to make geometry at all - and ' entities.add_instance(defn, trans)' of them as needed - the transformation used when adding determines the location and rotation.
                  Because they are each component instances you can swap one type for another as you wish - in code instance.definition=xxxx ...
                  IF you only have one simple block domino make one definition and add_instances of that multiple times... You can apply different materials separately to each instance... 🤓

                  TIG

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • D Offline
                    dany67300
                    last edited by

                    I hadn't seen that i could put a different material to each instance of a same defintion 😳
                    thanks a lot ! it works very well 😄

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • B Offline
                      bentleykfrog
                      last edited by

                      @dany67300 said:

                      It takes me about 2 s to create 400 pieces, and it's growing exponentially. With 600 pieces -> 7s, 1200 pcs -> 50s...
                      Is it normal to take so much time ? Each domino is created in his own group for the moment, but it doesn't change if I create them directly in my scene.

                      I've noticed that sketchup slows down greatly once the number of groups in the current tier is greater than 1000 on my machine. Does your script speed up if the geometry is written straight to Sketchup.active_model.entities?

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • thomthomT Offline
                        thomthom
                        last edited by

                        @bentleykfrog said:

                        @dany67300 said:

                        It takes me about 2 s to create 400 pieces, and it's growing exponentially. With 600 pieces -> 7s, 1200 pcs -> 50s...
                        Is it normal to take so much time ? Each domino is created in his own group for the moment, but it doesn't change if I create them directly in my scene.

                        I've noticed that sketchup slows down greatly once the number of groups in the current tier is greater than 1000 on my machine. Does your script speed up if the geometry is written straight to Sketchup.active_model.entities?

                        Adding entities to SketchUp slows down in direct proportion to how many existing entities there is in the entities collection you add to.

                        Thomas Thomassen — SketchUp Monkey & Coding addict
                        List of my plugins and link to the CookieWare fund

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • S Offline
                          sm4rt
                          last edited by

                          Well I got a situation !! 😲

                          C:\>ruby test.rb range = (0..90000000) t=Time.now; x=0; i=0; range.each { |i| x = 0b0011_1100<<2 }; Time.now-t 13.156753 t=Time.now; x=0; i=0; range.each { |i| x = 60*4 }; Time.now-t 10.400594

                          just a no sens !!!
                          Really a human oriented language 😉

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • Dan RathbunD Offline
                            Dan Rathbun
                            last edited by

                            The for loop should be faster, try:

                            ` t = Time.now
                            for i in range do

                            code here

                            end
                            puts Time.now - t`

                            I'm not here much anymore.

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • S Offline
                              sm4rt
                              last edited by

                              Was talking about shifting binary number is longer then the same "base 10" arithmetic operation...

                              Which is no sense in processor calculation.
                              Try the same comparison in ASM, C++, PHP etc. and look the result^^

                              But in this case I think it's because x = 0b0011_1100<<2 affect the decimal number of the binary one to x variable so the number of edge clock needed is greater... IMO

                              Edit: And for loop isn't for me Result-for-each-variables.txt
                              here is my results of the test that ThomThom put above to prove that for loop is better then each one and that declaring variable before is faster too but it's still not true for my equipment...
                              (Ruby 1.9.2-p180 / Windows 7 64 bit / Intel Core i3 M 350 2.27GHz)

                              So I think that these optimizations depend of many variables....(versions of Ruby/Sketchup) Even if some will still be true in the future...

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • AdamBA Offline
                                AdamB
                                last edited by

                                Here's another to look out for. There is a (time) cost associated with "creating" a variable, so its often faster to use variables declared outside the scope of the executing block.

                                def doit
                                	
                                        start = Time.now
                                	10000.times {
                                		c = 5
                                		d = 5
                                		
                                		e = c + d
                                	}
                                	puts Time.now - start
                                	
                                	a = 0
                                	b = 0
                                	c = 0
                                	start = Time.now
                                	10000.times {
                                		a = 5
                                		b = 5
                                		
                                		c = a + b
                                	}
                                	puts Time.now - start
                                
                                end
                                

                                Developer of LightUp Click for website

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • G Offline
                                  glro
                                  last edited by

                                  @dan rathbun said:

                                  @dan rathbun said:

                                  its nice but...
                                  The code needs updating. It needs to search by ID instead.
                                  (Or have arrays of the Inspector captions in all the local versions.)

                                  Ooops.. just checked. The Outliner does not have an ID.
                                  But Jim's system call 'may' work. The window object can have a different "name" than the text displayed on the caption bar.
                                  Someone running a non-English version could test it and let us know.

                                  I run a spanish computer using french as default language, and it doesn't work...

                                  But there is a simple way to do it, using the standard line of code you mentioned, plus a messagebox

                                  result = UI.messagebox "if the outliner window is opened, close it?'", MB_YESNO
                                    if result == 6 #yes
                                  	  #close or open the outliner window
                                  		status=UI.show_inspector "Outliner"
                                  		if status==false then
                                  		  UI.show_inspector "Outliner"
                                  		end
                                   end
                                  

                                  This way, you don't toggle on the outliner window if it is not opened already, and if it is, you close it

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • Dan RathbunD Offline
                                    Dan Rathbun
                                    last edited by

                                    Actually we cannot close inspectors singly. Once they are open, we can only collapse or expand them.

                                    I'm not here much anymore.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • TIGT Offline
                                      TIG Moderator
                                      last edited by

                                      For Windows windows only - using Win32API.so - which you'll need to 'require'...
                                      You can 'close' just one window thus:
                                      closeWindow("Outliner")
                                      where:

                                      def closeWindow(name)
                                          findWindow = Win32API.new("user32.dll","FindWindow",['P','P'],'N')
                                          pw=findWindow.call(0,name)
                                          sendMessage = Win32API.new("user32.dll","SendMessage",['N','N','N','P'],'N')
                                          sendMessage.call(pw,0x0112,0xF060,0)#CLOSES
                                      end
                                      

                                      You can check if a window is 'visible' with:

                                      def windowIsVisible?(name)
                                          findWindow = Win32API.new("user32.dll","FindWindow",['P','P'],'N')
                                          isWindowVisible= Win32API.new("user32.dll","IsWindowVisible",['P'],'N')
                                          pw=findWindow.call(0,name)
                                          return isWindowVisible.call(pw)==1 
                                      end
                                      

                                      Incidentally, the roll 'up'/'down' methods I often use are:

                                      def toggleRollUp(name)
                                          findWindow = Win32API.new("user32.dll","FindWindow",['P','P'],'N')
                                          pw=findWindow.call(0,name)
                                          sendMessage = Win32API.new("user32.dll","SendMessage",['N','N','N','P'],'N')
                                          sendMessage.call(pw,0x00a1,2,"")#WM_NCLBUTTONDOWN
                                          sendMessage.call(pw,0x0202,0,"")#WM_LBUTTONUP
                                      end
                                      def isRolledUp?(name)
                                          findWindow = Win32API.new("user32.dll","FindWindow",['P','P'],'N')
                                          getWindowRect= Win32API.new("user32.dll","GetWindowRect",['P','PP'],'N')
                                          pw=findWindow.call(0,name)
                                          data=Array.new.fill(0.chr,0..4*4).join
                                          getWindowRect.call(pw,data)
                                          rect=data.unpack("i*")
                                          #if window height is less than 90 then the window is rolledup
                                          return (rect[3]-rect[1]) < 90
                                      end
                                      

                                      ... using isRolledUp?("Outliner") to then toggleRollUp("Outliner") to roll it up if it's down etc...

                                      TIG

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • G Offline
                                        glro
                                        last edited by

                                        @dan rathbun said:

                                        Actually we cannot close inspectors singly. Once they are open, we can only collapse or expand them.

                                        i am surely missing something

                                        you are right; the window is not closed, only collapsed

                                        but it is sufficient; my experience is that sketchup doesn't crash anymore

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • TIGT Offline
                                          TIG Moderator
                                          last edited by

                                          Collapsing [rolling-up] the Outliner is sufficient to stop it updating and causing bugsplats.
                                          However, my methods just posted do also 'close' the window if desired - but this might be annoying for users [?]... remember to use the 'locale' name for the window...

                                          TIG

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • thomthomT Offline
                                            thomthom
                                            last edited by

                                            Page 152
                                            http://www.slideshare.net/tenderlove/zomg-why-is-this-code-so-slow

                                            attr_accessor :property vs def property; @property; end

                                            attr_accessor wins.

                                            Video of the presentation where the linked slideshow was used: http://confreaks.com/videos/427-rubyconf2010-zomg-why-is-this-code-so-slow

                                            Thomas Thomassen — SketchUp Monkey & Coding addict
                                            List of my plugins and link to the CookieWare fund

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 3
                                            • 4
                                            • 5
                                            • 6
                                            • 5 / 6
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Buy SketchPlus
                                            Buy SUbD
                                            Buy WrapR
                                            Buy eBook
                                            Buy Modelur
                                            Buy Vertex Tools
                                            Buy SketchCuisine
                                            Buy FormFonts

                                            Advertisement