Oops, I meant: timespacex ';a;b;c' 0.012332 5.03338e7 timespacex ';a;b;c' 0.011768 5.03338e7 (;a;b;c)-:a,b,c 1
Efficiency characteristics are the same, result (the most important part) is different. -- Raul On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 7:04 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > If I define: > a=:?~1000000 > b=:0.1+?~1000000 > c=:?~1000000 > > I get: > timespacex 'a,b,c' > 0.016585 6.71104e7 > timespacex '>a;b;c' > 0.012863 5.0334e7 > timespacex '>a;b;c' > 0.011867 5.0334e7 > timespacex 'a,b,c' > 0.015703 6.71104e7 > > So it looks like >a;b;c is slightly more efficient than a,b,c, but > it's nowhere close to a factor of 2, so I think I'd ignore this issue > in most contexts. > > -- > Raul > > > On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote: >> You have 3 large lists a, b, c (1000000 atoms each). You want to join them >> into one long list. What is the best way to do this? >> >> Henry Rich >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
