Printable View
Ok you will all be gald to know me and the other moderators have began marking your entries! We will get the results to you as soon as we can :)
For now if you wish to discuss the contest or any of the entries which are now visible, please post here :)
PINO
If you download my app, DO NOT open the form in the form designer, because that messes it up, instead right-click the form in the project explorer and then click <View Code>.
Then expand the regions to find my code.
Thanks to Mendhak for pointing this out. ;)
Took me a while to realise :mad: :pQuote:
Originally posted by wossname
If you download my app, DO NOT open the form in the form designer, because that messes it up, instead right-click the form in the project explorer and then click <View Code>.
Then expand the regions to find my code.
Thanks to Mendhak for pointing this out. ;)
The waiting is killing me. Did I make at least second to last or what?!
hehe! wont be long now and we will get the results to you :)
... said the evil 666 squirrel...
How about posting what you got so far and posting the rest
as you finish them???
Come on mods! Where's my result? Haul ass guys, it doesnt take a whole week to test this many entries.
*Whip sound effects*
Results Are In!!!
VB . Net Entries
Thanks for everyone who entered! And well done to wossname :)Code:Name Mark
______________________
nokia8210 44
lesssalter 50
ericdalnas 60
digiesh 64
ntg 68
arun.ns 69
space.27 74
mendhak 79
wossname 99 <<< Winner!!!!
VB 6 Entries
Thanks for everyone who entered! And well done to Dave Sell :)Code:
Mark Name
__________________
VbasicGirl 33
Acidic 37
BPD 38
NotLKH 39
Cyborg 39
Riis 46
RobDog 55
BodwardUK 59
StephenHickerson 63
Ex-FB 65
Dsheller 68
Merri 74
NoteMe 78
SeniorBadger 85
Dave Sell 92 <<< winner
__________________
:)
(errr, *cough* you'd better spell Bodwad's name correctly, before he reads this.... :lol: )
Bodwad just PWND EVERYONE'S butts!!
W00t!!!!!!!!
:afrog:
:) my appoligise for incorrect names i'll try and get them fixed :)
and yes bodwards entry was VERY good but davesell was also very close to taking gold :)
:lol: I edited it to correct it then you edited it and made it say BodwardUK again :lol:Quote:
Posted by Pino
:) my appoligise for incorrect names i'll try and get them fixed :)
and yes bodwards entry was VERY good but davesell was also very close to taking gold :)
Good competition everyone :)
Very enjoyable.
What was the prize? I've forgotten.
Congratulations chaps! And thanks it was great fun to do!
1000 Postcounts to the top dogs,Quote:
Originally posted by wossname
Good competition everyone :)
Very enjoyable.
What was the prize? I've forgotten.
300 to the to the top 50 %
100 to the last place winners.
and Kudos to the Judges!!!
:wave:
Congratulations to BodwadUK and wossname on winning!
NotLKH, the prize is a temporary custom title of something
like "Contest Winner" I think.
Bodwad for Prime Minister....:D
Stephen... arg.. I hate that spelling!
At least I didn't do as bad as I thought.. although I wish you would've posted average timings rather than just marks. I was more interested in seeing everyones times lol. Oh well guess I can go download everyones.
changed it for you :)Quote:
Originally posted by StevenHickerson
Stephen... arg.. I hate that spelling!
At least I didn't do as bad as I thought.. although I wish you would've posted average timings rather than just marks. I was more interested in seeing everyones times lol. Oh well guess I can go download everyones.
Er, Just out of curiosity how was the marking weighed between speed and design.
Because I was fascinated to see how badwad had done it.... but when I time his app I get about 210 milliseconds.....
When I time mine I get 15 milliseconds....
I used the high resolution timer.
I'm not complaining, I'm just really interested in the performance tuning, and if there's maybe a faster one that he re-posted that isn't in the original forum could you publish it for us.
Thanks!
The problem is that the diffrent apps gives diffrent times on the diffrent machines....like my app that was 4 times slower on Electromans PC, that is supposed to be at least 3 times faster then my machine....
Yes, but the speeds should remain proportional to each other roughly?
Not nesessery...not if a CPU is missing a instruction set an have to emulate something that an other CPU have....then the code that need that instruction set is but ****ed...
Mmm - I'm sceptical. No offence to Bodwad, but I don't see any optimisation. A quick check show's that the code he posted is doing something in the order of 1,000,000 calculations, in comparison mine is doing about 5,000..... I'm not saying mine is anything great, but I don't see how this code could be faster. I honestly suspect that this is maybe his first attempt (as I got it out of the entries forum), and I'd just like to see what the winning code was so I can learn from it.
Besides, the only isntructions I'm using are +, - and *, I doubt if any of those would be emulated :p
Ok, firstly please remember the FAQ, contests are for fun :)
secondly bodwads ran Faster than yours on my machine, quite a bit faster!
Bodwad recieved the highest speed mark, I'm not going to go into details about who got what for which aspect, i dont want to start arguments! (And thats what the mods and me have agreed to just display the final mark :))
Your entrie was very good :) and thanks for entering
Which language won in the speed stakes? VB6 or VB.Net? IE what was the millisecond difference between bodwad's entry and mine?
Still waiting for my prize by the way.
Will it be accessible via the User CP pages?
Don't get me wrong, I'm just curious to learn about what improvements could be made. That's why I'm so fascinated by the discrepencies, could you check that the version of the code in the forums is his latest version, I'm just asuming that I've picked up an old version of the code, as I cannot see anyway the posted code would run at any great speed at all.Quote:
Originally posted by Pino
Ok, firstly please remember the FAQ, contests are for fun :)
secondly bodwads ran Faster than yours on my machine, quite a bit faster!
Bodwad recieved the highest speed mark, I'm not going to go into details about who got what for which aspect, i dont want to start arguments! (And thats what the mods and me have agreed to just display the final mark :))
Your entrie was very good :) and thanks for entering
If it is the correct code, out of interest what sort of machine are you running it on, because so far I've ran it on three of my different machines (An Intel P4 2.4gig, an AMD 1800+ and an AMD 600) with all the same results. Either I'm missing something hugely here, or it's the wrong code or there's something very strange happening internally withthe processors (which I would love to find out about - as like most programmers I delve into games programming for fun quite a lot and every ounce of speed that can be eeked out of algorithms is useful). Thanks.
Well was the test in the IDE or as EXE? Well I tested My code, Ex-FBs code and Bodwads code in the IDE on my machine and I got these results...:D
HEhehe....how did he win....:D...ohh....Ex-FB can you test my code against yours on the machine?Code:Bodwad: 0.21177 sec
Ex-FB: 0.00580 sec
NoteMe: 0.00567 sec
No problem mate!
In IDE
BodWad: 205 ms
Ex-FB: 11 ms
NoteMe: 8ms
Compiled
BodWad: 61ms
Ex-FB: 11ms
NoteMe: 7ms
Excellent job :thumb:
though you must have missed electromans rule change ("My first reaction was that the rules already said one per line and I then checked and saw it wasn't in. I then said well if it is allowed then it would loose points for appearance unless it was done very well with proper indenting or something like that. And as you can see after checking with others the change was made.") *cough*
:p
Look, I loved this contest, and I don't actually care about the prize or winning, but I am quite concerned about a game I'm working on right now which is highly optimised for 3d calcs. I don't want to find oiut that it is going to run like a dog on a certain type of processor.
So my code is the fastest one...:D..well nice of me...:D....ohh....and if you look at it...it is only one on each line...;)...I just used 4 colums...;)...so the list didn't wasn't that long...there is NOOOO speed gain...just a visual improvement...;)
There's a massive speed gain. :p If you cange it back to 0 columns your back up at 13ms. (12ms compiled) :p :thumb: But well done anyway, a much cleaner bit of code than mine. Nice one.
Well maybe it is only on my machine you don't get a gain then....I just tested it again....and I got 0.1 ms faster on one column then 10...:D
Did you set the column value to 0? because with 1, you still get columns......
Anyway, it doesn't matter, I think I've found the problem with my code, I was doing something silly, and luckily it's easy for me to change in my game code. So it's probably best to just move on.
Congratulations to all involved, I had great fun. Unfortunately I've been waaaaay to busy to get involved with the maze competition (although I think it'd be great fun), but I'm hoping to get some time for the next one.... Good luck to all you maze-tracking folk! :thumb:
Yes I did...and even if I didn't I can't see how it should gain speed, it is just the rendering of the list box that changes. You still have to call Add just as many times...
I used 5 columns on my listbox.. it greatly enhances speed when adding to the listbox. Dont ask me why it does but it does. I would think it might have something to do with the redrawing of the listbox in windows but I dont see why its redrawing while invisble (which mine was set to when adding).
*shrug*
I used a single column so it would put one prime per line. I thought
that was how it was supposed to be according to the rules?
:(
The rules was trying to make you call Add 1000 times in stead of just a few. So you where not allowed to concatinate strings...;)