Yes, it would be interesting what other people have to say about this! "HEY DAVID, CAN YOU HEAR US?" <vbg>

but seriously, i've added to my testing routing to include the testing between variables with 'm.' and without (remembering a heated discussion here on UT a while back). back then i got the feeling from that thread, that it would be faster to use 'm.' very carfully and with certain rules.

well, i've got the proof in the following test. BUT, looking at the results, we're talking about a minimal advantage, that i question the need to even talk about it.

taking in consideration that i have to loop 5 million times in order to see some difference, well...

here is the test. please change "use inv" to a table of your choice and change the 'pnx' to a field name + "x".

clear
_Screen.LockScreen = .t.
_vfp.Autoyield = .f.

clear all
release all
use inv
t = 0
pnx = 7
starttime = seconds()
for i=1 to 5000000
	t = pnx * (-1)
endfor
?"pnx * (-1)              = " + str(seconds() - starttime, 8, 4)

clear all
release all
use inv
t = 0
pnx = 7
starttime = seconds()
for i=1 to 5000000
	t = 0 - pnx
endfor
?"0 - pnx                 = " + str(seconds() - starttime, 8, 4)

clear all
release all
use inv
t = 0
pnx = 7
starttime = seconds()
for m.i=1 to 5000000
	t = m.pnx * (-1)
endfor
?"m.pnx * (-1)            = " + str(seconds() - starttime, 8, 4)

clear all
release all
use inv
t = 0
pnx = 7
starttime = seconds()
for m.i=1 to 5000000
	t = 0 - m.pnx
endfor
?"0 - m.pnx               = " + str(seconds() - starttime, 8, 4)

clear all
release all
use inv
t = 0
pnx = 7
starttime = seconds()
for i=1 to 5000000
	store pnx * (-1) to t
endfor
?"store pnx * (-1) to t = " + str(seconds() - starttime, 8, 4)

clear all
release all
use inv
t = 0
pnx = 7
starttime = seconds()
for i=1 to 5000000
	store 0 - pnx to t
endfor
?"store 0 - pnx to t    = " + str(seconds() - starttime, 8, 4)

clear all
release all
use inv
t = 0
pnx = 7
starttime = seconds()
for m.i=1 to 5000000
	store m.pnx * (-1) to t
endfor
?"store m.pnx * (-1) to t = " + str(seconds() - starttime, 8, 4)

clear all
release all
use inv
t = 0
pnx = 7
starttime = seconds()
for m.i=1 to 5000000
	store 0 - m.pnx to t
endfor
?"store 0 - m.pnx to t    = " + str(seconds() - starttime, 8, 4)

_Screen.LockScreen = .f.
_vfp.Autoyield = .t.

>Same to me, may be its time to change to the new old-fashioned stuffs. It would be interesting to see what David F. say about it (he's the king of speed testing to me)
>
>>you are welcome <s>
>
>>what is interesting to me is, that the old 'store' command is faster then the '='. i never us 'store' because i don't like the redability in the code. i think it's easier to read/follow the code if '=' is used.
>
>>>That's correct, it seems like a delay with RAND() function. Thank's for the Heads Up :-)