I don't know why I thought Java used UTF-8, thank you for the
correction. So yeah, would be interesting to see the tests on C done
with wide char in UTF-16.
On Dec 26, 1:54 am, Glen Stampoultzis gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On 26 December 2010 03:00, Ivan ivankob...@gmail.com wrote:
Would be
Would be interesting to see tests done on UTF-8 strings as this is the
only type that Java supports.
On a side note, Merry Christmas everyone!
Ivan.
On Dec 25, 4:52 am, Michael Gardner gardne...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 24, 2010, at 8:19 PM, David Nolen wrote:
((long double) end-start) /
On 26 December 2010 03:00, Ivan ivankob...@gmail.com wrote:
Would be interesting to see tests done on UTF-8 strings as this is the
only type that Java supports.
Do you mean UTF-16?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
To post to this
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 2:55 AM, Alan Busby thebu...@thebusby.com wrote:
Hi All,
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Meikel Brandmeyer m...@kotka.de wrote:
Most interesting is also the relation between the different versions on
the given machine. Just the numbers of one algorithm aren't
I guess it would be a better guess if you could includethe cpu type/speed
for a rough reference...
Devrim Baris Acar
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 09:55, Alan Busby thebu...@thebusby.com wrote:
Hi All,
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Meikel Brandmeyer m...@kotka.de wrote:
Most interesting
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Devrim Baris Acar devrimba...@gmail.comwrote:
I guess it would be a better guess if you could includethe cpu type/speed
for a rough reference...
It was on an Intel Xeon E5410 (2.33GHz), though like others have already
said there are a number of factors that
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Alan Busby thebu...@thebusby.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Devrim Baris Acar
devrimba...@gmail.comwrote:
I guess it would be a better guess if you could includethe cpu type/speed
for a rough reference...
It was on an Intel Xeon E5410
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 8:19 PM, David Nolen dnolen.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On OS X at least the following program shows identical performance to the
JVM using 64 bit integers, ~2000 nanoseconds on my machine. So Clojure is
not too far behind.
w/o any GCC optimizations of course. With O2, the
On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 11:28 AM, David Nolen dnolen.li...@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 8:19 PM, David Nolen dnolen.li...@gmail.comwrote:
On OS X at least the following program shows identical performance to the
JVM using 64 bit integers, ~2000 nanoseconds on my machine. So Clojure
On Dec 24, 2010, at 8:19 PM, David Nolen wrote:
((long double) end-start) / 1000.0
I don't think this math is correct. The units for the values returned by
mach_absolute_time() are CPU-dependent:
http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/#qa/qa2004/qa1398.html
Using gettimeofday() on my 2.0 GHz
Simpler and faster:
(count (clojure.string/replace s ))
On 2010/12/22 18:52, Rayne wrote:
I have a piece of code, and I'd like to see how fast it can be.
(defn count-num-chars [^String s]
(loop [s s acc 0]
(if (seq s)
(recur (rest s) (if (= (first s) \space) acc (inc
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 3:24 AM, Remco van 't Veer rwvtv...@gmail.com wrote:
Simpler and faster:
(count (clojure.string/replace s ))
Simpler, yes, but not at all faster:
Time (in nanoseconds): 120485.9396
This is about comparable to the slow, unoptimized loop posted at the
start of this
(set! *unchecked-math* true)
(defn count-num-chars ^long [^String s]
(let [l (.length s)
c \space]
(loop [i 0 acc 0]
(if ( i l)
(recur (inc i)
(if (identical? (.charAt s i) c) acc
(inc acc)))
acc
Clojure
On 2010/12/23 18:30, Ken Wesson wrote:
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 3:24 AM, Remco van 't Veer rwvtv...@gmail.com wrote:
Simpler and faster:
(count (clojure.string/replace s ))
Simpler, yes, but not at all faster:
Time (in nanoseconds): 120485.9396
This is about comparable to the slow,
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Remco van 't Veer rwvtv...@gmail.comwrote:
On my system it is about 10x faster than the code in the original
thread. Together with the amount of time saved writing it, it's full
seconds, maybe even minutes faster! I guess your nanoseconds and are
not my
Any ideas why people are getting such radically different results on
their machines? It's hard for library writers to write any kind of
optimized code if optimized on one machine means slower on
another.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups Clojure group.
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Mark Engelberg
mark.engelb...@gmail.com wrote:
Any ideas why people are getting such radically different results on
their machines? It's hard for library writers to write any kind of
optimized code if optimized on one machine means slower on
another.
FWIW,
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Sean Corfield seancorfi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Mark Engelberg
mark.engelb...@gmail.com wrote:
Any ideas why people are getting such radically different results on
their machines? It's hard for library writers to write any kind of
Hi,
Am 24.12.2010 um 02:08 schrieb Ken Wesson:
It's also possible that -server vs. -client is an issue here, also
running it a few times in a row so JIT will have kicked in. I used
-server and ran each test a few times until the numbers settled down
before posting my timings here; I'm not
Hi All,
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Meikel Brandmeyer m...@kotka.de wrote:
Most interesting is also the relation between the different versions on the
given machine. Just the numbers of one algorithm aren't really comparable, I
guess. (different machine, different load, different phase
I have a piece of code, and I'd like to see how fast it can be.
(defn count-num-chars [^String s]
(loop [s s acc 0]
(if (seq s)
(recur (rest s) (if (= (first s) \space) acc (inc acc)))
acc)))
This is the fastest I've been able to get it. The function is very
simple. It takes a
Which version of Clojure are you using?
(How to speed that up depends a lot of the version you use)
I would like to see a with a longer run.
Optimised clojure is *asymptotically* nearly as fast as Java.
With under 1000 calls I am not sure the JIT is called.
Best,
Nicolas.
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010
chouser wrote a solution earlier. I and a buddy modified it (a very
little) bit and managed to get it pretty blazing:
ra...@ubuntu:~$ cake run ~/challenge.clj
Chars outputted: 460
Time (in nanoseconds): 5768.677
Here is the function:
(defn count-num-chars [^String s]
(let [len (.length s)
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Rayne disciplera...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a piece of code, and I'd like to see how fast it can be.
(defn count-num-chars [^String s]
(loop [s s acc 0]
(if (seq s)
(recur (rest s) (if (= (first s) \space) acc (inc acc)))
acc)))
This is the
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Ken Wesson kwess...@gmail.com wrote:
(defn count-num-chars [^String s]
(let [l (int (.length s))]
(loop [i (int 0) acc (int 0)]
(if ( i l)
(recur (unchecked-inc i) (if (= (.charAt s i) \space) acc
(unchecked-inc acc)))
acc
15k
I actually pasted the wrong code here:
(defn count-num-chars [^String s]
(let [len (.length s)
space (int 32)]
(loop [i (int 0), c (int 0)]
(if ( i len)
(recur
(inc i)
(if (== (int (.charAt s i)) space)
c
(unchecked-inc c)))
Also, forgot to add an unchecked-int:
(defn count-num-chars [^String s]
(let [len (.length s)
space (int 32)]
(loop [i (int 0), c (int 0)]
(if ( i len)
(recur
(unchecked-inc i)
(if (== (int (.charAt s i)) space)
c
(unchecked-inc
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Rayne disciplera...@gmail.com wrote:
chouser wrote a solution earlier. I and a buddy modified it (a very
little) bit and managed to get it pretty blazing:
ra...@ubuntu:~$ cake run ~/challenge.clj
Chars outputted: 460
Time (in nanoseconds): 5768.677
Here is
On my machine, your reduce example (I actually wrote that myself as my
first try) runs marginally slower than my loop example. I don't know
why you're getting such weird numbers. Your areduce example is worst
of all at 74072 on my machine.
On Dec 22, 12:39 pm, David Powell djpow...@djpowell.net
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Rayne disciplera...@gmail.com wrote:
Running it gives me around 137343.295 nanoseconds. I've seen some Java
algorithms that could run at just under 3000 nanoseconds.
What do the Java implementations look like?
(defn count-num-chars [^String s]
(let [l
Wednesday, December 22, 2010, 6:52:01 PM, you wrote:
On my machine, your reduce example (I actually wrote that myself as my
first try) runs marginally slower than my loop example. I don't know
why you're getting such weird numbers. Your areduce example is worst
of all at 74072 on my machine.
private static int countNumChars(String s) {
int num = s.length();
for (int i = 0; i s.length(); i++) {
if (s.charAt(i) == ' ') {
num--;
}
}
return num;
}
Is one of the fastest I've seen. It runs around
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 10:19 PM, Rayne disciplera...@gmail.com wrote:
private static int countNumChars(String s) {
int num = s.length();
for (int i = 0; i s.length(); i++) {
if (s.charAt(i) == ' ') {
num--;
}
}
33 matches
Mail list logo
