Sorry! This time the 50 50 case was garbled... (left out the hard part!)
It should have been (for the 2.4 Ghz Mac):
0j7 ": 5 (6!:2) '%. 50 50 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1000'
0.0017531
and on the 3 Ghz Linux machine:
0j7 ": 5 (6!:2) '%. 50 50 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1000'
0.0029506
The mysterious factor of 2 is still there...
- joey
At 15:18 -0800 2007/12/08, Joey K Tuttle wrote:
No, actually it is like holding a 1990's mainframe in your
hand... My expression wasn't garbled (at least by my email
client) and the one I'm asking about is -
6!:2 '%. 500 500 [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
the 50 50 was just too brief for comparing --- on the Mac
0j7 ": 5 (6!:2) '50 50 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1000'
0.0000700
I agree that using multiple cores would be interesting.
- joey
At 16:02 -0700 2007/12/08, Don Guinn wrote:
I assume your test expression is supposed to be 6!:2'%.?50 50$1000' . Must
have gotten garbled somewhere.
Just to add another timing - on a Pocket PC - 0.439 seconds for the above
expression. That's like holding a 1970s mainframe in your hand!
About a PC performing as well as a mainframe - the mainframes always have
and still blow PCs (microcomputers) away. It's just that the PC is not many
years behind the fastest mainframes. But mainframes and PCs are changing.
PCs are dual-core and quad-core. The single CPU mainframe is being replaced
by racks of microcomputers working together. Perhaps it's time for J to look
into taking advantage of multiple processors available on PCs less than
$1000.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
