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

Reply via email to