Simple and fast, lightweight HashList-Class (no APIs)

[xiaoyao]

Originally, I just asked a simple question.
In the previous example, the primary key is a string, and the data is: integer
My usage is: primary key: value, the data is also a value, how to optimize it better, or how to change the source code of this dictionary object, because many people will not change it.
Then adding or querying the primary key is:
add(key as long, value as long)
add(byval key as long, value as long)
Which is faster, I just asked 2 sentences, and you guys responded with hundreds of words, but did not solve the actual problem.

I hope there will be no war in the world, no atomic bombs, no missiles.
Of course, everyone can discuss technical issues on the forum, but it should not be so intense.

at #75,you say , can you write a new class for this?
so i finished in #78.

I would have expected someone more professional to implement this class module with a simple modification
Since I'm not familiar with dictionary objects, modification takes hours.

[Schmidt]

Originally, I just asked a simple question.
In the previous example, the primary key is a string, and the data is: integer
My usage is: primary key: value, the data is also a value, how to optimize it better, or how to change the source code of this dictionary object, because many people will not change it.
Then adding or querying the primary key is:
add(key as long, value as long)
add(byval key as long, value as long)
Which is faster, I just asked 2 sentences, and you guys responded with hundreds of words, but did not solve the actual problem.

My hints for you in #75 were comparably short (21 words).
It's you who's producing spam-postings with hundreds of words (which don't belong into this discussion-topic here).

Please inform yourself, about the purpose of "discussion-topics in the CodeBank" first
(before you start typing, placing your unrelated nonsense, in threads where it does not belong)

I hope there will be no war in the world, no atomic bombs, no missiles.
Of course, everyone can discuss technical issues on the forum, but it should not be so intense.

Your obsession with "war and atomic-bombs" aside,
please allow me to be "intense", whilst pointing out your "rude, spamming behaviour" here.

at #75,you say , can you write a new class for this?
so i finished in #78.

#78 did neither answer your own question -
nor has it anything to do with cHashD (which is the topic of this discussion-thread).

Olaf

[xiaoyao]

Because this topic itself is about discussing lightweight dictionary objects. The code is small enough, but not everyone has the ability to change what they need. In the end, it took me a few hours to complete it.
I just had a question at the beginning, why getpropA can only execute 20,000 times a second, but the Dictionary object can read the key value 2 million times a second, and the speed difference is 100 times. I have doubts about the problem, so I studied it for a while.
If I don't make it clear about the specific usage scenarios, it is definitely not appropriate.
The actual situation is that I only use it to read 2 data, and the maximum number does not exceed 50.
For the case of using 1000, 100,000 key values, some objects may be faster.

So my question is actually, which dictionary object is faster to use when only a small amount of data is required to be queried?
Finally, I changed the dictionary object that supports dozens of different data types to only support integer types. This code still has 324 lines.
In the end, I changed a dictionary object with only about 30 lines.

[Schmidt]

The actual situation is that I only use it to read 2 data, and the maximum number does not exceed 50.

Again, this is not the right place for you to "think out loud" (beginner-style, in bad english).

It goes without saying, that "finding the index among Long-Values, with max 50 entries", performs best, when done:
- via brute force, against a normal VB-LongArray with 50 slots
- using a FindIndexForValue-function, placed in a *.bas-Module

But nothing of that has anything to do, with the universally usable Class-encapsulation of cHashD (which this thread is dedicated to).

Please move your "musings, and findings" whilst "learning to program" into the Main-Forum please.

Olaf

[xiaoyao]

I just need a faster object for reading few properties. Perhaps properties such as HASHTABLE"CalcHash(key) as long" are not used at all.

I only need to read an array of 10 data in a loop to find out which row is eligible, but its usage is the same as that of a dictionary, and it also needs ADD, GETITEM, Remove

I just don't understand why Microsoft's Dictionary, which supports dozens of data types, can still maintain 2 million calls per second when there are only 10 data types.
But VBA.Collection only has 300,000 times.
cHashD2 IS 350,000 times.

[Schmidt]

I just need a faster object for reading few properties.

No, you don't -
and I will consider you a beginner, as long as you do not understand the meaning of "No, you don't" (in that context).

Also, the results of your performance-comparisons are misleading (probably because you did not compile to native code, all options checked).
Just played that through with the cHashD-implementation as posted in #30 here -
and with Long-Values as Keys, cHashD (in a small set of 50 entries) is only about factor 2 slower than the MS-Dictionary (not factor 5-6 as you claimed).

So again, please stop posting so much non-sensical or misleading information here.

Olaf

[xiaoyao]

Ok,sorry,I TEST IN VB6 IDE,

Compile it into EXE to run faster (and set various optimizations), and the power mode of the computer must be turned on to high performance, so that the comparison speed can be objective.
At the same time, my test does not represent the actual performance of the components. Everyone should test on their own computer. The running speed of WIN7 and WIN10 may be quite different.

GetArrHwnd in ide :2 million times per second
GetArrHwnd in Exe :5 million times per second
my test not like this:

for  i 1 to 1000
   m_OldProc = GetArrHwnd(Hwnd)
next

Private Function ControlCallBack(ByVal Hwnd As Long, ByVal Msg As Long, ByVal wParam As Long, ByVal lParam As Long) As Long
        '---------------------------------
        QueryPerformanceCounter C1

        Dim m_OldProc As Long
        m_OldProc = GetArrHwnd(Hwnd)

        QueryPerformanceCounter C2
        '---------------------------------
        AllUsedTime = C2 - C1 + AllUsedTime
        MsgCount = MsgCount + 1

       ControlCallBack = CallWindowProc(m_OldProc, Hwnd, Msg, wParam, lParam)
end function

Private Function GetArrHwnd(ByVal Hwnd As Long) As Long
Dim i As Long
For i = 0 To HookCount
    If ArrHwnd(i) = Hwnd Then
        GetArrHwnd = ArrOldProc(i)
        Exit For
    End If
Next
End Function

I added 20 subclasses of controls and ended up with about the same speed. That's all for this topic.
I'm sorry for misleading you.