Hi,

One code, one PC, different VFP versions:

VFP 5

no mdot          0.327999999997701
mdot          0.343000000000757
10,000,000 loop no cursor                  -4
string no mdot          0.000000000000000
string mdot          0.000000000000000
string***************************
Created cursor.
no mdot          0.344000000000960
mdot          0.344000000000960
loop with cursor          0.000000000000000

VFP 6

no mdot          0,561999999998079
mdot          0,547000000002299
10,000,000 loop no cursor                   3
string no mdot          0,000000000000000
string mdot          0,000000000000000
string **************************
Created cursor.
no mdot          0,562999999998283
mdot          0,530999999999040
loop with cursor          6,026365348267642

VFP 7

no mdot          0,473999999998341
mdot          0,469000000000960
10,000,000 loop no cursor                   1
string no mdot          0,000000000000000
string mdot          0,000000000000000
string***************************
Created cursor.
no mdot          1,264999999999418
mdot          0,469000000000960
loop with cursor        169,722814498257500

VFP 8

no mdot          0.545999999998458
mdot          0.546999999998661
10,000,000 loop no cursor                   0
string no mdot          0.000000000000000
string mdot          0.000000000000000
string***************************
Created cursor.
no mdot          2.001000000000204
mdot          0.547000000002299
loop with cursor        265.813528334879900

VFP 9

no mdot          0,563000000001921
mdot          0,561999999998079
10,000,000 loop no cursor                   0
string no mdot          0,000000000000000
string mdot          0,000000000000000
string***************************
Created cursor.
no mdot          2,031999999999243
mdot          0,578000000001339
loop with cursor        251,557093424660300

VFP A 32

no mdot          0,593000000000757
mdot          0,610000000000582
10,000,000 loop no cursor                  -3
string no mdot          0,000000000000000
string mdot          0,000000000000000
string***************************
Created cursor.
no mdot          2,030999999999040
mdot          0,594000000000960
loop with cursor        241,919191918477400

VFP A 64

no mdot          0,735000000000582
mdot          0,765999999999622
10,000,000 loop no cursor                  -4
string no mdot          0,000000000000000
string mdot          0,000000000000000
string***************************
Created cursor.
no mdot          2,171999999998661
mdot          0,764999999999418
loop with cursor        183,921568627492000

MartinaJ

>I am totally convinced the average programmer knows little about science. It is not taught the way medical professionals are taught science. Having worked with actual world-renowned medical science professors that were department heads, I got a lot of on the job training to use science while coding.
>
>Donald Knuth is a hero to some idiots quoting his over-used-misunderstood Optimization is the root of all evil. How many of you read the entire article - and understood it?
>
>https://pic.plover.com/knuth-GOTO.pdf
>
>He also called out crappy coders:
>
>"The conventional wisdom shared by many of today's software engineers (ya like there are a lot of those) calls for ignoring efficiency in the small; but I believe this is simply an overreaction to the abuses they see being practiced by penny-wise-and-pound-foolish programmers, who can't debug or maintain their "optimized" programs." That sounds all too familiar from what I've seen.
>
>He goes on "In established engineering disciplines a 12% improvement EASILY OBTAINED, is never considered marginal (except by crappy coders); and I believe the same viewpoint should prevail in software engineering."
>
>I am not penny-wise-pound-foolish. I make code faster, cleaner and better every time.
>
>Refer back to Knuth - a 12% increase easily obtained is never considered marginal.
>
>Using the following code in VFP9 I got a 227% increase simply using mdot with a cursor in place. That is scientific measurement. It is required to magnify the sample to get results. That is scientific. It is fact. The look of the code with or without mdot is IRRELEVANT except to the most immature.
>
>So, Knuth supports a 12%. I'm certain a 227% would be a big deal, especially adding the safety factor.
>
>The reason for science is to prevent a bunch of morons from attacking things to the betterment of all. Everytime I post anything about mdot, and for that matter anything at all a particular bully attacks what I say. Too bad the blocking feature here does not make such bullies completely invisible. The bullies and their supporters can go pound sand.
>
>

clear
>use in select("c_mdot")
>set decimals to 15
>
>g=10000000
>lcString="create cursor c_Mdot ("
>a1=seconds()
>for x = 1 to g
>	c=x
>endfor x
>a1=seconds()-a1
>?"no mdot",a1
>
>lcString="create cursor c_Mdot ("
>a2=seconds()
>for x = 1 to g
>	c=m.x
>endfor x
>a2=seconds()-a2
>?"mdot",a2
>x=a1-a2
>?"10,000,000 loop no cursor",(x/a2)*100
>
>g=254
>a1=seconds()
>x=1
>lcString="create cursor c_Mdot (c"+alltrim(str(x))+" char (1)"
>for x = 2 to g
>	lcString=lcString+",c"+alltrim(str(x))+" char (1)"
>endfor x
>lcString=lcString+")"
>a1=seconds()-a1
>?"string no mdot",a1
>
>a2=seconds()
>x=1
>lcString="create cursor c_Mdot (c"+alltrim(str(m.x))+" char (1)"
>for x = 2 to g
>	lcString=m.lcString+",c"+alltrim(str(m.x))+" char (1)"
>endfor x
>lcString=m.lcString+")"
>a2=seconds()-m.a2
>?"string mdot",m.a2
>
>x=a1-a2
>?"string",(x/a2)*100
>
>&lcString
>?"Created cursor."
>g=10000000
>a1=seconds()
>for x = 1 to g
>	c=x
>endfor x
>a1=seconds()-a1
>?"no mdot",m.a1
>
>a2=seconds()
>for x = 1 to g
>	c=m.x
>endfor x
>a2=seconds()-a2
>?"mdot",m.a2
>
>x=a1-a2
>?"loop with cursor",(x/a2)*100
>
>set decimals to 2