Ah, there it is.. Thanks Ric, a salute to your surname. (sorry, could not resist) Groetjes, Wim
2012/9/13 Ric Sherlock <tikk...@gmail.com> > I also struggled a bit to find out how to enable the J Keyboard on my > HTC One S running JellyBean. In the end I discovered that once the > keyboard comes up in the J application, I can drag down the bar at the > top of the window to show the option to "Select Input Method". > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Wim de Lange <wimdela...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > 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 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
