Let's be fair; I don't think the Matlab guy excluded the random number
generation. The 1000 (or was it 1001?) repetitions of the matrix
multiply should also be in the J expression, something I don't think
I've seen. As far as I can see, the execution speedup of Matlab doesn't
cover the extra time it takes to type in the Matlab code, assuming there
are no typos in that long piece of Matlab.
Roger Hui wrote:
You should exclude the time needed to generate the random numbers.
----- Original Message -----
From: Devon McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thursday, November 8, 2007 10:30
Subject: Re: [Jprogramming] speed of matrix*vector operation.
To: Programming forum <[email protected]>
6!:2 '(?256$0)*"1]?312 256$0'
0.121752
On 11/8/07, Michael Dykman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Nov 8, 2007 1:13 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I told my friend about how nice J was. Am I wrong?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|\/| Randy A MacDonald | APL: If you can say it, it's done.. (ram)
|/\| ramacd <at> nbnet.nb.ca |
|\ | | The only real problem with APL is that
BSc(Math) UNBF'83 | it is "still ahead of its time."
Sapere Aude | - Morten Kromberg
Natural Born APL'er |
-----------------------------------------------------(INTP)----{ gnat }-
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
