DosTips.com

You guys are amazing! This is why I love this forum. Of all the places to get a performance improvement I never would have looked at the 'set' commands. This code as a whole is almost entirely sets (thousands and thousands of them) with only a little bit of looping and branching in between in betwee...

You could call a subroutine and pass it the name of the file, along the lines of 'CALL :GETSIZE chat.txt' The :GETSIZE would then do 'set size=%~Z1', which expands to the size of the file it was passed as parameter 1. Type 'CALL /?' into the CMD window to see these kinds of special expansions. Also,...

I literally just threw this together to prove the concept and it's 1:30am so hopefully nobody jumps on me for doing it in the quickest dirtiest way possible, but here's the gist: findtest.bat: @echo off echo raw wmic output: wmic csproduct get name echo piping to find limits what gets returned: wmic...

Just wanted to let everyone know that I updated the first several posts in this thread with the new, much more efficient code. I haven't done much to optimize the main control program except implement a couple of the suggestions out of this thread. Most of my efforts have been on the workhorse 'aesc...

Einstein, I believe I'm mostly done digesting your massive post. Please if I've overlooked something let me know. I can see that in the first parts you're showing that a FOR loop executes much faster than a GOTO loop. No offense meant, but I believe that should be considered common knowledge, or at ...

Einstein, thank you very much for that. I'm going to need to take some time tonight and really digest it, as it looks like you've made some significant gains there. In the meantime, I'll post some of the optimizations I've made myself to the code: First of all I have good news and bad news. The bad ...

Antonio thank you so much for your feedback, and while I'm at it thank you again for your BinToHex and HexToBin scripts. I do hope you don't mind that I've modified them for this task! (note in the source I retained your original authorship statements) Allow me to address your primary concern about ...

Thanks Dave for the kind word. I think I've said too many times already that this was never meant as anything more than a proof of concept, so practicality is a distant secondary concern . This was a somewhat natural conclusion from that "string encoding" thread up through the Vigenere cip...

Thank you for giving it a try! I honestly didn't expect anyone to download and tinker with it, that's why I broke the code into sections instead of one big blob at the expense of making it harder to reassemble. I figured at best someone might want to read over some of the sections and comment. When ...

Yes the sphere of interest for this is extremely small by it's very nature, and much more so because the code is so slow it's impractical to use beyond a proof of concept. Thank you for dropping me a kind comment in any case! Maybe in v2.0 I'll work in some ASCII pics for you I did implement several...

No comments yet, but that's OK, my feelings aren't hurt I'm working on some improvements to the code. So far I tweaked the PID handler to give it finer resolution over starting PIDs. It used to launch 'maxPID' number of PIDs at once, wait for the last one to finish, and then launch 'maxPID' more. Li...

I then have used "ping -n 1 -w 800 1.1.1.1" on A. I'm sure here you meant to say 192.168.0.11, but BRAVO! I, like you, am dumbfounded what is causing the weird behavior in timing 'ping' that makes it look like it's rounding off the wait time, when according to your test it appears to not ...

Batch or otherwise, all I was expecting is for the command to act as its help file indicates: -w Timeout : Specifies the amount of time, in milliseconds, to wait for the Echo Reply message that corresponds to a given Echo Request message to be received. If the Echo Reply message is not received with...

Sorry foxidrive I was at work when I did the pingtest so I don't have the code here. I first just repeated einstein's test (his code is above) because I couldn't believe his results. I got the same thing he got, and started to suspect the 500ms rounding. So I modified his test with new values to tes...

UPDATED 11/08/13 Since there's no more need to put code in this third post, I thought I'd post an update on how much faster the modified code runs. For the exact same ~1KB test file on my Q6600 the times are down in the 12-14s range now as opposed to the 40+s seen in the first post: c:\Users\Marc\D...