Are there any known differences in how ChatScript functions on Linux, MacOS, and Windows? Is it expected to be exactly the same (functionally) on each?

Does anyone have opinions about a preferred/recommended OS for creating content in ChatScript (outside of the many non-CS-related reasons to prefer various operating systems = ) )?

Thanks,
Kevin

The “functionality” is the same on all OS. But the speed of a CS server is not. Linux systems will support much faster server behavior than windows systems.  For creating content it makes no difference from CS point of view (content created on one and compiled on one can be copied over to the other.

On the plus side for Linux, it makes for easy Amazon and/or RaspberryPi hosting.

Under Window console, I have found it painfully slow (though the php interface is quick running localhost on Win OS).

No idea about MacOS

Terrific—thanks for the quick responses!

By faster, the identical operation for the exact same bot on a Mac and on Windows was 30-50 times(!) faster on MacOS than on Windows, even though the XPS 15 PC had much more powerful physical specs. We actually timed it. I saw someone on Stack Overflow reported 30 times slower on Windows. 

Is this because it is harder for Windows to compile C++? Or because of different architectures under the hood? Always been curious. Not compared MacOS with Linux on PC yet.

by faster NOT on windows I mean windows server code is 1) worse under the hood in windows and 2) implemented worse in chatscript server code

Ismael Velasco - Jan 25, 2019:

By faster, the identical operation for the exact same bot on a Mac and on Windows was 30-50 times(!) faster on MacOS than on Windows, even though the XPS 15 PC had much more powerful physical specs. We actually timed it. I saw someone on Stack Overflow reported 30 times slower on Windows. 

Is this because it is harder for Windows to compile C++? Or because of different architectures under the hood? Always been curious. Not compared MacOS with Linux on PC yet.

I may have some good news on this front (for Windows users).

After receiving the initial responses to my question here, we conducted some time trials and had results similar to what you report. For example, running :build 0 took about 22 s on a MacBook Pro and about 4 minutes on a roughly comparable Windows laptop.

Curious about the huge discrepancy, one of our hardware engineers did some profiling and found the real culprit to be the anti-virus software. Disabling the real-time virus protection feature of Windows Defender brought the 4 minutes down to 14 seconds! Even keeping Windows Defender active, but excluding the ChatScript-master folder solved much of the slowdown problem, resulting in about 20 s for :build 0 to complete.

Another team member with a different Windows set-up observed similar improvements after disabling Norton and Cortana.

So, while I don’t doubt that Bruce Wilcox speaks with authority when he says ChatScript is faster not on Windows, :) our experiments suggest that much of the performance problem (at least for some use cases) can be resolved by adjusting anti-virus protection.

I didnt realize we were talking about build times, I was referring to networking behavior.

That is a fantastic find for Windows users. I am in any case hoping to dual boot to Linux on my PC (I love the XPS 15 hardware, and Windows can be a useful add-on, but for Web development Linux Rulez OK). But I suggest your findings should go into the CS documentation, since 14 secs to 4 minutes is not trivial.

Here’s a quick one:

Does :reset re-seed the random number generator? How random is the random number generator?

Is there a way the script can re-seed it?

Thanks,

Robby.

To support debugging repetition, random number is NOT random.  The initial seed is based on the user’s name, and what volley count this is.  NORMALLY one would not it to be truly random because any specific user gets random behavior.  It’s only if you erased the user that that user would see a repetition.  It is possible to override that random value in script, so you could make it be based on real time of day or whatever.

Thanks Bruce!

Kevin,

For the sake of discussion, one huge difference may be that Linux can be a super computer built from low cost PCs, such as a used LAN liquidation following an office network upgrade to new PCs.

Recommend (perhaps) Aidreams.co.uk member Korrelan for advice on that, with a rolling cart of eight PCs and one head node PC with a huge screen, looks really super fun.  Seems compiling CS in g++ might work on a super computer.