...and you should use fib=: 3 : 0 if. y e. 0 1 do. y else. (fib y-1) + fib y-2 end. )
to get the same results. Otherwise your fib is one ahead. ts 'fib 35' 305.701 51968 An advantage of Haskell in this is the use of type Int, notice the difference: with type Int: *Main> fib 35 9227465 (50.37 secs, 2454360728 bytes) with type Integer *Main> fib 35 9227465 (76.86 secs, 2884656900 bytes) > To be more precise you should execute: > > ts 'fib"0 i.35' > > > > R.E. Boss schreef: > >> In http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/chat/2008-January/000869.html the >> link http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/blog is mentioned, at the end of which >> I found >> >> Language Time (N=36) >> Ruby (1.8.5) 64.26s >> Python (2.4) 25.16s >> Haskell (GHC 6.8) 0.48s >> Parallel Haskell (GHC 6.8) 0.42s >> >> This was for the most 'naive fibonacci algorithm': >> >> fib=: 3 : 0 >> if. y e. 0 1 do. 1 else. (fib y-1) + fib y-2 end. >> ) >> >> On my machine I got >> >> ts'fib 35' >> 213.43542 52736 >> >> Is anybody capable of comparing J-figures with (some of) the other languages >> (except for parallel Haskell) on one machine? >> >> >> R.E. Boss >> >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> >> >> >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
