Sorry Devon it's not for the timing I pointed to that. It's just for the
comparison of both results.

>    xx-:xx2
> 0
>   


Hallo Devon McCormick, je schreef op 11-03-10 21:25:
> That's two out of a million - I doubt the timer is precise enough to capture
> the difference between the two cases.
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Aai <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>   
>>
>> Hallo Devon McCormick, je schreef op 11-03-10 20:11:
>>     
>>> It's a pretty good improvement already.
>>>
>>>    hc10k =:  , ] +/@:{~ (,&<: -.)@{:
>>>    AnN   =:  % 1+i.@:#                  NB.  a(n)/n
>>>    MxAnN =:  >./;.1~ 2 (=<.)@:^. 1...@# NB.  Max a(n)/n btw successive
>>>       
>> 2^
>>     
>>>    HCF=. 3 : '1 1,(#2...@#);(,<@;@(|.@(#;. 1) (],~1$~[)&.>
>>> <@:>:;.1)@>@{:)^:(y-2) <2'
>>>
>>>    6!:2 'xx=. mx...@ann 1 1 hc10k @]^:[~ 2^20'
>>> 2485.4382
>>>    6!:2 'xx2=. mx...@ann HCF 20'
>>> 0.38284575
>>>    xx-:xx2
>>> 0
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> be careful in choosing comparable arguments:
>> in this case  hc10k needs _2+2^20
>>
>> --
>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>> =@@i
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
>>
>>     
>
>
>   

-- 
Met vriendelijke groet,
=@@i

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to