Not about the speed, wihc gives 0.013 om my HTC Sensation, but how to enable the J Keyboard. Did what whas in the help file, but if I tap long on the console, I get the menu to Cut, Copy and Paste. No keyboard selection as described. I'm running Android 4. Is the readme describing behaviour from android 2.6?
Groetjes, Wim 2012/9/13 Roger Hui <rogerhui.can...@gmail.com> > 0. One of the goals of the linear representation (which you were using to > generate the multi-digit display of 0.1&) is that if you re-enter the line > you get the original noun/verb/whatever back. For some numbers many digits > may be required, esp. if the code is a bit off regarding how many digits > are required for the round-trip. The J interpreter depends on the C > formatting of numbers, so it would not surprise me if the code is in fact a > bit off in that regard. > > 1. The %. implementation does not take different paths that are dependent > on the values in a non-singular matrix. (Part of what makes it > algorithmically interesting :-). Therefore the time required should be the > same for different random matrices. Of course, unless you have ripped out > most of the stuff from your machine, that time would be impacted by e-mail > arriving, your moving the mouse, the browser doing whatever, your > anti-virus acting paranoid, whatever, whatever, ... > > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Joey K Tuttle <j...@qued.com> wrote: > > > I agree with your point, but the "benchmark" has always included > > generating the matrix and that is typically a very small part of the time > > and should be relatively stable (although I suppose inverting the same > > "random" matrix over and over would remove some variation). Your > suggestion > > of using a left argument for 6!:2 is the best way to reduce (or at lease > > smooth out) variability. > > > > In repeating these expressions on my iPad, I discovered something I was > > never aware of before... I accidentally tacked a & onto the end of the > > expression - that has a very interesting (and actually useful) result. > But > > because it is a pain to email selections from the iPad, these were done > on > > an iMac i7 - > > > > 100 (6!:2) '%. 50 50 ?@$ 1000' > > 0.00080055 > > 100 (6!:2) '%. 50 50 ?@$ 1000'& > > 0.000807989999999999967& > > 0.1 > > 0.1 > > 0.1& > > 0.100000000000000006& > > 0j40 ": 0.1 > > 0.**100000000000000005551115123125**7827021182 > > > > I never realized that tacking on the & displays the number which might be > > useful to see the actual floating point representation. May be about as > > silly as inverting random matrices, but also amusing... > > > > > > On 2012/09/12 14:51 , Devon McCormick wrote: > > > >> Part of the reason for the variability is that you're generating a new > >> matrix each time and including the generation in your timing. > >> Something like this should give a more stable result: > >> > >> 6!:2 '%.mat' [ mat=. 50 50?.@$1000 > >> > >> Also, this form better allows you to run multiple timings to get a > >> more stable number, e.g.: > >> > >> (10) 6!:2 '%.mat' > >> > >> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Robert Cyr <robert....@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> Results of the posted benchmark vary quie a bit: on this Nexus 7, > >>> > >>> 6!:2'%.50 50 ?.@$1000' > >>> 0.043118 > >>> > >>> 6!:2'%.50 50 ?.@$1000' > >>> 0.033788 > >>> > >>> 6!:2'%.50 50 ?.@$1000' > >>> 0.030006 > >>> > >>> 6!:2'%.50 50 ?.@$1000' > >>> 0.034632 > >>> > >>> 6!:2'%.50 50 ?.@$1000' > >>> 0.023798 > >>> > >>> And with a larger sample, > >>> > >>> 6!:2'%.500 500 ?.@$1000' > >>> 7.91767 > >>> > >>> 6!:2'%.500 500 ?.@$1000' > >>> 8.07115 > >>> > >>> 6!:2'%.500 500 ?.@$1000' > >>> 7.94837 > >>> > >>> About twice the time of the iPad > >>> On Sep 9, 2012 6:53 AM, "bill lam" <bbill....@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> From google, iphone 4 uses cortex-a8 and that cpu uses vfp-lite which > >>>> is 10 times slower than a regular vfp used in cortex-a9. > >>>> > >>>> Сбт, 08 Сен 2012, Joey K Tuttle писал(а): > >>>> > >>>>> That's a nice speedup! It will be interesting to try the iPhone 5. > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm curious if anyone has a timing from a generation 3 iPad, it may > >>>>> well be faster than my iPad 2. > >>>>> > >>>>> On 2012/09/08 06:30 , J. Patrick Harrington wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The iPhone 4S is faster: 5.6 sec > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Fri, 7 Sep 2012, Joey K Tuttle wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> iPhone 4 - 18.2 seconds > >>>>>>> iPad 2 - 4.6 seconds > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 2012/09/07 19:48 , bill lam wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I am curious to know what are the timings for iphone and ipad. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> It is around 6 to 11 seconds on android depending on CPU. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Срд, 05 Сен 2012, Paul Jackson писал(а): > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Some time ago, you and Roger were talking about timings on > >>>>>>>>> %. 500 500 ?@$ 1000 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I believe Roger said he had timings from the IPSA days. He also > >>>>>>>>> said the > >>>>>>>>> matix was considerably smaller. Did you ever get those early > >>>>>>>>> machine > >>>>>>>>> timings? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Paul > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------** > > ---------- > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/**forums.htm > <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