this is a public e-mail forum.
maybe you guys should take your private war private.
peace, gentlemen.
-----Original Message-----
From: Len Budney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2000 11:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Safecat challenge
Just for fun, why not put your money where your mouth is? I'll give
you $250 if you can write a program which 1) Exactly conforms to the
maildir protocol (including fsync()), and 2) runs 50 times faster than
safecat, in an independent benchmark using actual emails, and 3) runs
at least 20 times faster on a Linux machine with an ext2 filesystem
mounted async, like mine. Since this is such a lock for you, you can
dictate terms: what will you pay me after you fail?
Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Considering your utterly inept approach to profiling, it certainly
> > appears you don't do it that often.
>
> Correct, professor. I prefer to write efficient code right from the
> start. What a novel concept!
The prosecution rests, your honor. We've heard from Dijkstra, Knuth,
and other expert witnesses. The defendent has confessed to the crime
of total boobery.
> > I'll repeat, for the last time: safecat, on my system at least, runs
> > within a factor of two of /bin/cat.
>
> And on other systems, it benchmarks at 1/50th the speed of
> efficiently-written code.
1. You benchmarked safecat? You saw somebody else's benchmarks? No. So
shut up.
2. I said ``/bin/cat''. You said, ``efficiently written code'', by which
you meant ``something I'm imagining right now in my head, which isn't
safecat, which I've never profiled. There's a profiler in my head!''
Beep! Thanks for playing; take your booby prize at the door. (I'm done
abusing the list with this off-topic thread.)
Len.
PS A speedup of 2 is nothing to sneeze at. It's closer to 3 on an unloaded
system; again nothing to sneeze at. I'll be rewriting safecat Real Soon
Now.
