|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#21 |
High-roller
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,829
Reputation: 836
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#22 | |
Little Clucker
![]() Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 17
Reputation: 0
|
![]()
Example
Quote:
It can be a problem only for me =\ |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#23 | |
High-roller
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,829
Reputation: 836
|
![]() Quote:
pawn Code:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#24 | ||
Gangsta
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: India
Posts: 878
Reputation: 313
|
![]() Quote:
Of course, you will always find me (most of the times) critizing someone because the replies I make which appreciate are very few. I simply don't reply "Good" "Cool" , etc. Sometimes I throw away few reps to satisfy the author if he even cares about them. For Gammix, it might appear that I keep critizing him too often. It is because Gammix keeps releasing something every day and I find faults with it everytime and I just critize it so that it gets improved. Maybe I critize in a mean way or maybe I should change the way I critize. That is what others have to tell rather than complaining that everything is critized in the forums. Quote:
2. You just wrote the worst possible code for both YINI and eINI. Both these processors provide section id system which cuts down the speed significantly. Maybe even 10x faster with section ids. 3. Your speed tests don't consider opening/writing time at all. In fact, eINI is slower than YINI while parsing given the fact that eINI provides lot of customizable options, it has to be slow. However, the range of features it provides will circumvent the speed loss. In fact, eINI writes and reads faster which compensates for the speed loss while opening the file. 4. YINI and eINI provide dynamic loading system which will just throw your system out of the competition. 5. eINI provides keyid system too which if used could be even 20x faster than YINI but that would be cheating because not everybody knows how to use it and most people would not use it. So the mainstream competition should remain within normal Read/Write functions but there should be at least reasonable optimizations. If you were to implement those features in your Improved DINI. You can't even call it improved DINI. It would simply be a new INI processor. I can't do proper speed test so all my new speed claims in this reply are mere guesses. At first the situation was, gini was slow and did not have enough features. Even though you called it an update for dini it wasn't still worth it. People had to switch to SQL or a new INI processor. Now with your str(un)pack removed, gini meets eINI and YINI when the worst possible code of eINI and YINI is used. Frankly, I don't want to hurt your feelings but you have too much ego. You are don't like critizisim for some reason. Sometimes you keep arguing about the same thing again and again in spite of best efforts of many to convience you. I just saw a post where Crayder said the very same thing which I had already told you at least 5 times with big explaination that "you CANNOT add prints/formats/etc inside speed test code". With your logic I can prove that dini is as fast as eINI. I will add 100000 printfs inside the speed test loop and prove that eINI takes 1000ms and dini takes 1001ms so they are almost the same. You say that everytime there has to be code inside becaz its practical but that is not true with speed tests. If you add just one/two printf inside the command, you will find that ZCMD comes close to IZCMD and you may even conclude that they are the same. In fact, all performance optimizations loose their meaning if you do speed tests that way beause every optimization will appear to be negligible. If you still don't know why, get a course on debugging & testing. I am not sure if you are a teen or doing your engineering in CS but anyway the best thing for you right now is to check testing docs and procedures. Last edited by Yashas; 15/07/2016 at 07:16 PM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#25 |
High-roller
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,829
Reputation: 836
|
![]()
In my previous replies i told you why i don't want to make another INI processor; "Waste of time". "You can judge by the number of users eINI have." eINI is the newest one out there, faster than DINI and YINI but people still stick with DINI who are using old scripts or are unaware and others are satisfied with YINI. So you should have realized by now there is no point in inventing something new, so i decided to atleast improve upon DINI with my DINI2 which i find people have started using.
Instead of just speaking of my wrong coding practice, share some of your code which i'll find useful and better in ways. And why would you consider old arguments here? Trying to be sarcastic? (i never expressed myself rude against your criticism unless you were provocative) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#26 |
Little Clucker
![]() Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Bosna i Hercegovina
Posts: 9
Reputation: 2
|
![]()
Is that faster than this http://forum.sa-mp.com/showthread.php?t=581453
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#27 |
Gangsta
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 587
Reputation: 142
|
![]()
I don't think so, INI processors never been, never will be faster than SQL.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#28 | ||
Little Clucker
![]() Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 17
Reputation: 0
|
![]()
Gammix i'm want use dini2 in lethaldudb2 (http://pastebin.com/UwsfdScb) but i have problem
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#29 | |
High-roller
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,829
Reputation: 836
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#30 |
High-roller
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,829
Reputation: 836
|
![]()
Update v2.3.3:
- Improved timeout config, now the include will timeout index 0 file when more than "INI_MAX_INSTANCES" files are opened. - Decreased timeout limit, was unnecessarily high upto 1000! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[Include] [I-ZCMD]Improved ZCMD - Fastest Command Processor | Yashas | Includes | 102 | 28/12/2018 11:46 PM |
[Off] Dini2? | yurin | Português/Portuguese | 5 | 27/11/2016 03:09 AM |
[Include] eXtended INI Processor - Fast & Feature Rich INI Processor | Yashas | Includes | 28 | 01/09/2015 08:45 PM |
[INC+FS] Aero File Processor by Luby * Updated! | luby | Filterscripts | 15 | 14/05/2009 02:07 PM |