Talk:Mian-Chowla sequence: Difference between revisions

From Rosetta Code
Content added Content deleted
(→‎Execution Speed?: Perl6 verification.)
Line 18: Line 18:
::''| all Perl 6 RC entries are run daily against a nightly development build of blead Perl 6 for smoke testing''
::''| all Perl 6 RC entries are run daily against a nightly development build of blead Perl 6 for smoke testing''
:: Any thoughts on the RC examples when used for this? Do you create some specific running order for the RC tasks in any way to aid in your verification? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 14:08, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
:: Any thoughts on the RC examples when used for this? Do you create some specific running order for the RC tasks in any way to aid in your verification? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 14:08, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

:: Hello, thanks for the answer. I understand your concern, and also I am impressed by your Perl 6 involvement. Anyway this task is nice because it is also (but not only) an efficiency test for compilers about number crunching and dynamic array storage allocation. Have a good luck. --[[User:PatGarrett|PatGarrett]] ([[User talk:PatGarrett|talk]]) 14:14, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:16, 15 March 2019

Distinct?

Hi, could you further explain what distinct means in the task description? Thanks. --Paddy3118 (talk) 09:50, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Scrub that, The OEIS entry made sense to me. --Paddy3118 (talk) 09:54, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Means a unique sum. E.G. 3 can't be in the sequence since 1 + 3 = 4 and 2 + 2 = 4. --Thundergnat (talk) 12:07, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


Execution Speed?

Hi, it could be nice to have as a third task, the program duration. This gives an indicator of the language efficiency (and the algorithm too). I have tried among several Basic language implementations and the elapsed time, for 100 terms, is spread between 2 seconds and 25 minutes ! --PatGarrett (talk) 11:48, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

In general, Rosettacode discourages emphasizing program execution speed. It is more about comparison of concepts, and focusing on speed tends to lead to heavily optimized code which may become difficult for a new language user to read. It is sometimes useful, or at least entertaining to have an idea of relative execution speeds, but I hesitate to make it, or even imply that it should be, a requirement.
When I am developing tasks, I try to choose goals that most languages should be able to do in about a minute or less of processing time. Selfishly in some part, because all Perl 6 RC entries are run daily against a nightly development build of blead Perl 6 for smoke testing, so tasks that take excessively long really extend the testing time. (Running ~1000 or so tasks takes a while even if they aren't excessively long.) --Thundergnat (talk) 12:07, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
| all Perl 6 RC entries are run daily against a nightly development build of blead Perl 6 for smoke testing
Any thoughts on the RC examples when used for this? Do you create some specific running order for the RC tasks in any way to aid in your verification? --Paddy3118 (talk) 14:08, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for the answer. I understand your concern, and also I am impressed by your Perl 6 involvement. Anyway this task is nice because it is also (but not only) an efficiency test for compilers about number crunching and dynamic array storage allocation. Have a good luck. --PatGarrett (talk) 14:14, 15 March 2019 (UTC)