Optimization Tips
-
@whaat said:
I noticed in that thread about adding geometry to the model that someone tried creating the geometry by writing the mesh out to a temporary file format and then importing presumably with the
model.import
method. I'll have to try this and see how it compares withfill_from_mesh
. 3DS format seems like the logical choice.I've not tried it. But I got my doubts. Since it seems that it's SU's own processing when adding geometry that causes the slowdown - I'd be surprised if importing geometry suffers from the same slowdowns.
-
@thomthom said:
@tig said:
How about
model.selection.add(model.entities.to_a)
?I over simplified the example - updated to reflect a purpose.
Sidenote: .to_a
isn't required asselection.add
accepts any kind of collection object. It even let you feed it nested array of entities without the need toflatten
the array.I usually
.to_a
my entities, because it stops me falling into trap like modifying the entities whilst referring to them in a loop; or an array is also needed for some other things likeentities.transform(tr,entities.to_a)
-
$VERBOSE controls messages and warnings that get set to STDERR.
Set to nil so SU Ruby doesn't waste time spitting out useless warnings about sloppy code (like "warning: meaningless use of == in nil context") which noone wants to read anyway (when they're doing modelling.) Or my other favorite "warning: parenthesize arguments for future version."
Settings:
$VERBOSE = nil : sets 'Silent' mode
$VERBOSE = false : sets 'Medium' mode (default)
$VERBOSE = true : sets 'Verbose' modeThese settings correspond to ruby start parameter -W with values of 0,1,2 (which would also set $VERBOSE in a standard Ruby Environment.)
-
thanks Dan. That will come in handy!
-
I see a lot of SU scripts using some of the more compact iterators Ruby iterators. So they might read nice, but they're often slower than just simple for-loops.
http://blog.shingara.fr/each-vs-for.html
The other biggie to look out for is operations that involve copying when modifying in place would work just as well. Its slow and it generates lots of garbage.
-
@adamb said:
I see a lot of SU scripts using some of the more compact iterators Ruby iterators. So they might read nice, but they're often slower than just simple for-loops.
Interesting.
for
is faster thaneach
. Butdo ... end
is faster than{ ... }
? I really didn't expect that. And I don't see why. Thought it was just alternative syntax. But they behave differently?@adamb said:
The other biggie to look out for is operations that involve copying when modifying in place would work just as well. Its slow and it generates lots of garbage.
Interesting. I'll have to look through some of my code. I've not thought of that at all.
-
@thomthom said:
But do ... end is faster than { ... } ? I really didn't expect that. And I don't see why. Thought it was just alternative syntax. But they behave differently?
hm.. maybe not. seemed to very very little difference. suppose that's other things affecting the minute differences.
-
And why is for faster then each?
Looking at the source code for
Array.each
:VALUE rb_ary_each(ary) VALUE ary; { long i; for (i=0; i<RARRAY(ary)->len; i++) { rb_yield(RARRAY(ary)->ptr[i]); } return ary; }
It's using for as well, and the whole loop is done in C - so why isn't this C
for
loop faster than a rubyfor
loop? -
OT: Any chance the forum administrator of SCF can fix the [ruby] tag to not remove formatting. Formatting is a big part of understanding code, and while for regular text collapsing whitespace down to a single space might work, for code it does not.
-
@adamb said:
OT: Any chance the forum administrator of SCF can fix the [ruby:38zsi59i]tag to not remove formatting. Formatting is a big part of understanding code, and while for regular text collapsing whitespace down to a single space might work, for code it does not.
I think the
ruby
is meant for inline code. While you got thecode
tag for block codes. (Though I wish there was a way to expand it - I loathe internal scrollbars.) -
Interesting test Adam:
doit 6.474 3.292 nil
Note: I increased the number of iterations (
10000000.times { ... }
) -
Didn't realise Ruby would recreate the variables for each iteration. I'd thought it'd keep them for the duration of the loop...
-
Seems an arbitrary (and wrong) assumption that inline code requires removing whitespace. Why not just leave in what the author wrote rather than trying to second guess? Whatever.
-
Agree - whitespace eating of
ruby
has bothered me as well. Will ask if it can be changed. -
@thomthom said:
Didn't realise Ruby would recreate the variables for each iteration. I'd thought it'd keep them for the duration of the loop...
The closure you create with curly braces is handled as a first class object and passed as an argument to the iterator. This means the scope of any variables you mention inside that block is limited to that block - it must create them each time.
-
Is that why
each
is slow? -
Guys, Thom asked if we can do something with these white spaces but I have to say it is most probable that we cannot. I is hard coded somewhere in the php script of the forum software and even if we could tweak that, it would be impossible to keep it through upgrades (which is very due soon anyway).
Is the code tag not good (apart from that scrolling annoyance)?
-
It's ok. I just hoped there was a config UI for BBCode tags on the forum. Thought it was normal. The
code
tag is ok, just figured if it could be changed...I don't suppose there are forum plugins that can be installed? having the code block apply syntax highlighting would be a delight for us coders. Such as this:
http://code.google.com/p/syntaxhighlighter/
Edit: what version of phpBB does SCF run? I'm looking at this: http://www.phpbb.com/kb/article/adding-custom-bbcodes-in-phpbb3/ from this it appear to be that it'd be a matter of setting the HTML replacement for the ruby tag to not collapse white space using CSS.
Replacement sample something like this:
<span style="white-space:pre;">{TEXT}</span>
-
I can imagine you would like that syntax highlight! I use Notepad++ and know what a difference it is!
Coen and Tavi should be spoken to about these things.
-
@adamb said:
I see a lot of SU scripts using some of the more compact iterators Ruby iterators. So they might read nice, but they're often slower than just simple for-loops.
In regard to this should one init the variables used by
for in
to speed up things? or is that not needed?Would this
` x = 0
for x in collection...
end
be faster than
for x in collection...
end`
Advertisement