Using email is sometimes tricky...
Clarification: The "both interpreters" in spite of the confusing statement
was not mentioning J because originally I tested for the APLWin 4.0 but I
saw I had some implementation problem and discarded the results from
APLWin 4.0 but I forgot to remove the "both" interpreters. So the "both
interpreters" was for Dyalog 10.0.2 and APLWin 4.0 which were not showing
better results from one to the other.
>From another email (Richard Hill) it seems that APLWin 6.4 has similar
results to J so that would exclude APLWin in it's later incarnation but
Dyalog seems to suffer from a "less efficient" implementation as Devon
confirmed.
Conclusion: Dyalog APL suffers from a "less efficient" implementation for
f{iota} f
Paul Gauthier
APL Software Developer - Senior
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: 312-739-3467
Fax: 312-739-3496
CheckFree. The Company that Powers Payment on the WebSM.
http://www.checkfree.com/paybillsonline
Roger Hui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
06/01/2007 03:31 PM
Please respond to
General forum <[email protected]>
To
General forum <[email protected]>
cc
Subject
Re: [Jgeneral] Re: Challenge to expert J'ers
> These results points to either a "bug" in both interpreters or a
> mystery...
There is no bug in the J interpreter in this regard.
i.~i taking 0.065 and i.~f (and f i. f) taking
2.826 are legitimate. i. on floats with non-zero
tolerance is a harder problem and does take more
time to solve.
----- Original Message -----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, June 1, 2007 11:14 am
Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] Re: Challenge to expert J'ers
> RH> I suggest you try the benchmarks in
> RH> http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Essays/Index_in_Nub
> RH> in APL.
>
> I just did ( a simplified version) and there is definitively a
> major
> problem with the dyadic iota of Dyalog APL.
> These results points to either a "bug" in both interpreters or a
> mystery...
> It seems to me that APL implementers of Dyalog would be best to
> require
> your services for dyadic iota for float...
> Here are the results (all tests done on my PC, Dell OptiPlex
> GX270,
> Processor x86 Family 15 Model 2 Stepping 9 GenuineIntel
> ~2593 Mhz
>
> i=:2e5$1e5?2e9
> f=:i%i+0.1
> J J 6.01 APL Dyalog 10.0.2
> Integer .i~i 0.065 i{iota}i 0.109
> Float .i~f 2.826 f{iota}f 1402.875
>
> Can anyone confirm these results and add other APL implementations
> if they
> so have ?
> Roger ! How can we explain that huge difference between .i~f and
> f{iota}f
> ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
