Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Ralf Fassel <ralfixx@gmx.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.tcl
Subject: Re: optional args
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2026 17:24:28 +0100
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <ygabjhertxf.fsf@akutech.de>
References: <10ni7p2$38636$1@dont-email.me> <10nib2c$394up$2@dont-email.me> <10niita$3cclr$1@dont-email.me> <ygafr6qs9t9.fsf@akutech.de> <10nk9hv$3t7h4$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Trace: individual.net 3NhxPfxIRPuT2uEkW/j0KANnw8KKyBv30/4sykdC8fYFUFN2U=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:lj5Kp+u5lvziAhjkpTmLC1nfWdA= sha1:z7366GdPsodjKx6K3aGlzzu89vA= sha256:cpXB9UldM0yHo1Jtftm839KOGOOo1eD9a9QtEjwQaoo=
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.tcl:55499

* Rich <rich@example.invalid>
| > | % time [list test1 1 2 ] 10000
| > | 0.60965 microseconds per iteration
| >>
| > | % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6] 10000
| > | 0.56733 microseconds per iteration
| >>
| > | % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 10000
| > | 0.6530900000000001 microseconds per iteration
| > 
| > IME if you repeat the individual tests multiple times, you get even
| > bigger variations.  So instead of taking a single run and base the
| > result on that, repeat at least say 10 times to get an idea.
>
| Those time runs are already for 10000 repetitions.
| The third parameter to [time] is "number of repetitions to perform".

Yes, I know.  Nevertheless, on my otherwise idle PC:

    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.60292 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.56502 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.52475 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.5317 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.4898 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.43831 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.482 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.44397 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.55761 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.51394 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.46066 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.48599 microseconds per iteration
    % time [list test1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] 100000
    0.45478 microseconds per iteration

I.e. min 0.43831, max 0.60292 (delta ~25%).  If it comes to
*micro*seconds, I think there is no 'accurate' timing this way.

R'