(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); The way you write your code can be the difference between seconds, minutes, and hours for processing.

Below, I have an image showing the results of multiple tests, the tests showed on my computer roughly the exact same so I only select one result from each source as a median.

As you can see, just a little change in code has affected the speed of the application by several seconds. Not much but if used in the real world throughout the day, 7 seconds in an hour based upon the normal time this application takes, that's 140 seconds in an hour or 2 minutes and 20 seconds wasted. In a day, that's over half an hour.
You must login or register to view this content.

Ahem I think most of this will be fixed within 1-2 iterations of visual studio though. They will probably be focusing on compiler upgrades at this point, and because of that they may standardize the fastest method and incorporate it into the builder since it gets converted down to ILASM anyway.

Now comes the second issue. Most programmers don't clean the code to the point that would have the most equilibrium when a compile would occur. So those extra seconds you are talking about? they randomize with each updated compile. It's not a constant like you are trying to apply. No one polishes the code down to those numbers in the first place. That's why people use sheep farms to compile to save time.

There is even online services that will let you use their farms for a price of course. just have to upload the data.
Making small applications? a faster system would still cut the overall and wasted timings lower than if you used a workstation that was older, and not as up to date as the faster workstation.
So I highly doubt any of you kept around a old Pentium 4 to do compiles on.

If it's not constant then my statement of it still being constant over the long haul would still be accurate. Save 1 second lost 1 second. A process takes 1 second longer then it is speeds up by 1 second.

Two, yea a faster system would be great but even with fast systems every second counts in real world use. These companies are constantly having their software engineers run through the code and figure out better and faster ways for it to operate. That's how it's thought of when it comes to operating systems as well.

Yea, you can have a computer process bits faster and faster but you reach a point where it reads as fast as it can. This is where you should manage your code to handle even better.

They random each update with the compiler, what the hell does that even mean. Also, a lot of companies actually do look at the time saved. A that is running large software with multiple servers are constantly looking for ways to shave time. These programmers work and will shave 3 seconds here, 8 seconds there, 1 second and another 4 seconds there. Their systems run 24/7 until one of the systems burn out where they replace it and set it back up for another 24/7 run. Saving 30 seconds on a run cycle is huge. They run 365 days a year.

Look at Google, Google has to update their code constantly. It speeds things up. If they have a user searching for something and it takes 1.8 seconds to extract the information; that's 1.8 seconds of their system being used up for that particular person. If they shaved it to 1.7 seconds, then look at that, every 10 persons, they save 1 second of processing power. Imagine the millions of people who use Google each and every hour.