comment on

As requested by /msg from mirod on Benchmarking CGI::Simple is just under 3 times faster performing the most common function - getting the value of a param. It is variably faster on other common operations. Load times are more difficult to evaluate accurately. I would be interested in what you find.

use Benchmark;
use CGI;
use CGI::Simple;
$ENV{'QUERY_STRING'} = 'foo=bar&baz=boo';
$q = new CGI;
$s = new CGI::Simple;
timethese(250000, {'CGI' =>'$q->param("baz")', 'Simple' => '$s->param(
+"baz")'});

__DATA__
Benchmark: timing 250000 iterations of CGI, Simple...
       CGI: 27 wallclock secs (27.19 usr +  0.00 sys = 27.19 CPU) @ 91
+94.56/s (n=250000)
    Simple: 10 wallclock secs ( 9.99 usr +  0.00 sys =  9.99 CPU) @ 25
+025.03/s (n=250000)
[download]

Update

For a more in depth analysis see CGI::Simple vs CGI.pm - Is twice as fast good enough?

cheers

tachyon

s&&rsenoyhcatreve&&&s&n.+t&"$'$`$\"$\&"&ee&&y&srve&&d&&print

In reply to Re: Re: Re: RFC CGI.pm refactoring by tachyon
in thread RFC CGI.pm refactoring by tachyon

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


Do you know where your variables are?
	PerlMonks