>Viv,
>
>It's debatable. But do confess you're cheating a bit
<g>
>
>And it doesn't know you're cheating. It stores the decremented value and does not refetch it
>
>I suspect it's by design and for performance reasons [ a dup will be faster than a load ]
Guess so. I looked at your ildasm code and your test below confirms the performance benefit . But I'm not sure whether it's me or MS that's 'cheating' . It could certainly be argued that the decrement operation on ScaleFactor has not been completed when the value is assigned to i........
Regards,
Viv
>
>
>function_zero : 1.4 sec
>function_one: 4.66 sec
>function_two: 6.30 sec
>
>If we subtract the time for the loop
>function_one: 3.26 sec
>function_two: 4.90 sec
>
>3.26/4.9 = .66
>
>And since the ScaleFactor has a getter, it's a call rather than a load
>
>static void Main(string[] args)
> {
> Time.Execute(function_zero, false);
> Time.Execute(function_one, false);
> Time.Execute(function_two, true);
>
> }
> static void function_zero()
> {
> int i, j;
> for (i = int.MaxValue / 4; --i != 0; )
> {
> //j = --ScaleFactor;
> }
> }
> static void function_one()
> {
> int i, j;
> for (i = int.MaxValue/4; --i != 0; )
> {
> j = --ScaleFactor;
> }
> }
> static void function_two()
> {
> int i, j;
> for (i = int.MaxValue / 4; --i != 0; )
> {
> --ScaleFactor;
> j = ScaleFactor;
> }
> }
>
