Comments on: loops : and the winner is … http://en.nicoptere.net/?p=7 giving something back to the Flash community Sun, 08 Feb 2015 13:47:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.1 By: Hellsy http://en.nicoptere.net/?p=7&cpage=1#comment-160 Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:31:19 +0000 http://en.nicoptere.net/?p=7#comment-160 for ++ method: 215 ms – Number
for ++ method: 60 ms – uint
for ++ method: 51 ms – int

]]> By: sitron http://en.nicoptere.net/?p=7&cpage=1#comment-7 Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:06:09 +0000 http://en.nicoptere.net/?p=7#comment-7 well i guess the only “morality” is “never use for++ and uint”… (>140ms)
for the rest…
my best result is while++ with int (44ms)
mac pro / firefox / flash9

]]> By: nicoptere http://en.nicoptere.net/?p=7&cpage=1#comment-6 Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:25:43 +0000 http://en.nicoptere.net/?p=7#comment-6 hi! thanks for coming
I am on a MacBook / opera / FP9 which gives (almost always)
int:
for ++ method: 88 ms
while ++ method: 81 ms
while — method: 73 ms

number:
for ++ method: 44 ms
while ++ method: 74 ms
while — method: 76 ms

but I guess it’s platform dependant + player dependant + whatever dependant :/
it also seems that the decremental loops are a bit faster with the for loops.

]]> By: Mario Klingemann http://en.nicoptere.net/?p=7&cpage=1#comment-5 Sat, 12 Jul 2008 14:08:21 +0000 http://en.nicoptere.net/?p=7#comment-5 Strangely enough I am getting different results when I run your tests in my browser. I am seeing while++ and while — with int as a winner.

]]>