The value currently is about 400, but that may change without notice.
Henry Rich
On 12/24/2020 8:05 AM, emacstheviking wrote:
Henry,
What's the upper bound on that pre-allocated list, that's a good technique
actually. But what do I know?
My main issue was more the fact I couldn't see another way to do it but
both Raul and Clifford have shown me the way.
Seasons greeting to all, I'd express that in J but...
On Thu, 24 Dec 2020 at 13:01, Henry Rich <[email protected]> wrote:
i. 100 returns a section of a pre-allocated list, so it doesn't even
have to generate anything.
(? 100 $ y) is a smidgen slower than (100 ?@$ y)
Henry Rich
On 12/24/2020 7:37 AM, Raul Miller wrote:
Generating that list of numbers is trivial, compared to typical
language processing.
Consider a classic "for" loop, which calls a function 100 times. Here,
you are also generating 100 numbers. It's true that they are not
stored in memory simultaneously, but you're also generating 100 stack
frames, one after another -- and the cost of constructing those is
significant. Writing to one memory location is less work than
populating a typical stack frame.
Also, in terms of actual memory consumed -- unless you're up in the
megabytes, you aren't going to even notice it on modern machines.
That said, if your concern is the *relevance* of the numbers, I'd go
with something like:
1,.~? 100 $ ,: 2 1024 768
Which, looking at what Cliff Reiter suggested, is basically the same
concept.
Good luck,
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
