Author Topic: New Tricks For Pure Basic Coders. (Read 10560 times)

nitacku · « **Reply #30 on:** November 07, 2007, 03:54:00 pm »

Holy crap! This could make many things so much easier.
Especially things where you want to save memory.

Speler · « **Reply #31 on:** November 08, 2007, 09:21:00 am »

It's somewhat slower but that can be useful.

kalan_vod · « **Reply #32 on:** November 08, 2007, 09:34:00 am »

c1-->

CODE

ec1:DelVar X"X+(Ans=26)-(Ans=24->u
:While 1
:Output(1,1,X
:getkey
:u:Ans->X
:Endc2

ec2
Could be used in menus, since it is slower (saving some bytes when needed).

angel14995 · « **Reply #33 on:** November 08, 2007, 10:32:00 am »

And what's even better is you can save the value of u or v into a normal variable (just checked). Its really useful I can see for using the same formula over and over... hehehe, no need for prgmθTDH anymore, u -> H will got fine, and smaller

Speler · « **Reply #34 on:** November 08, 2007, 10:38:00 am »

I suppose I should mention that you can do a similar thing with lists. Try this:

:"randInt(1,3,2->LA
:Disp LA

kalan_vod · « **Reply #35 on:** November 08, 2007, 01:29:00 pm »

This could be really useful with xlib

..

Halifax · « **Reply #36 on:** November 16, 2007, 04:27:00 pm »

QuoteBegin-Super Speler+12 Oct, 2007, 15:33-->

QUOTE (Super Speler @ 12 Oct, 2007, 15:33)

Actually, 10^( is generally a faster way to do the same (or rather, a very similar) thing.

I actually just tested this today. 10^( takes 6 seconds while E only takes 4 seconds.

(1000 iterations were done by storing 1000 to variable B.)

c1

-->

CODE

ec1
For(A,1,1000
E3->B
End
c2

ec2

c1

-->

CODE

ec1
For(A,1,1000
10^(3->B
End
c2

ec2

And they both take the same number of bytes, so I would go with E since it is faster.

Speler · « **Reply #37 on:** November 16, 2007, 04:56:00 pm »

Really? Did you use StartTmr? Did you use the 10^( token or write that out?

Halifax · « **Reply #38 on:** November 16, 2007, 05:29:00 pm »

I used the token. And I ran the programs, respectively, 20 times to make sure that it wasn't just a fluke.

Also, I use getTmr->L1 and getTmr->L2 and then subtract the start time from the end time.

Xphoenix · « **Reply #39 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:12:00 pm »

Is getTmr some command I've never heard of?

DJ Omnimaga · « **Reply #40 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:36:00 pm »

same here, must be a 84+ only command.

We should keep this topic for 83+ only, to make sure all optimization tricks works on all calcs in the 83+ series

vuurrobin · « **Reply #41 on:** November 17, 2007, 03:27:00 am »

QUOTE

Also, I use getTmr->L1 and getTmr->L2 and then subtract the start time from the end time.

using gettmr->A and checktmr(A is easier (I think)

yes all time and date functions are 84+ (SE) only, but they are usefull if you want to see if a command is faster or not.

Speler · « **Reply #42 on:** November 17, 2007, 04:49:00 am »

DJ Omnimaga, that's silly. Not everyone codes on a 83+.

Halifax, if that's true then there are some errors in the Basic Code Timings... someone should redo that using startTmr.

Xphoenix · « **Reply #43 on:** November 17, 2007, 06:45:00 am »

No, no, I HAVE an 84+, I just don't see getTmr in the catalog.

There's Get(, GetCalc(, getDate, getDtFmt, getDtStr(,getTime, getTmFmt, getTmStr(, and getKey. No getTmr.

Halifax · « **Reply #44 on:** November 17, 2007, 06:57:00 am »

Well then it is getTime, which ever one returns a list of three values.

And yes that is very silly, especially since it would be applied to 83+ in some way. I am pretty sure that e3 would be faster on the 83+ too.

Author Topic: New Tricks For Pure Basic Coders. (Read 10560 times)

angel14995

Xphoenix

vuurrobin

Xphoenix