Talk:Mian-Chowla sequence: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Talk:Mian-Chowla sequence (view source)

Revision as of 15:41, 4 April 2019

974 bytes added , 5 years ago

→‎Basic Algorithm: Perhaps one of the procedural Python compressions costs more than it saves ?

Hout

9,655

edits

Revision as of 09:33, 21 March 2019 (view source) PureFox (talk \| contribs) (Replied to Enter your username's observation about the second Go version.) ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 15:41, 4 April 2019 (view source) Hout (talk \| contribs) (→‎Basic Algorithm: Perhaps one of the procedural Python compressions costs more than it saves ?)
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 34: :If your code is correct then it seems best if you replace my proceedural code, and maybe amend the comparative timings above the following, more functional version, (where the functional is now ~3x slower when run on the Tio.run site), as there is no need to keep my original proceedural code. : Thanks. --[[User:Paddy3118\|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118\|talk]]) 07:17, 21 March 2019 (UTC) :: You're welcome, I will do what you suggest. --[[User:Enter your username\|Enter your username]] ([[User talk:Enter your username\|talk]]) 13:38, 21 March 2019 (UTC)<br/> :: Thanks for pointing out that the 2nd Go version contains some redundant code - probably a hangover from an earlier version I wrote. Anyway, I've removed it now and achieved the ~40% performance boost you mentioned :) --[[User:PureFox\|PureFox]] ([[User talk:PureFox\|talk]]) 09:32, 21 March 2019 (UTC) :: You're welcome. --[[User:Enter your username\|Enter your username]] ([[User talk:Enter your username\|talk]]) 13:38, 21 March 2019 (UTC) Tidying and simplifying the functional Python, it occurred to me that one of the speed optimisations in your procedural version could possibly be losing more on the swings than it's gaining on the roundabouts. Most of the integers tested will not turn out to be Mian-Chowlas, so perhaps the cost of constructing a new set, saving all sums from the test, and then (in most cases) just clearing that set, is an uncertain investment ? (The current functional draft doesn't bother, and still seems fast). Of course, both versions are now at a few dozen milliseconds, so nothing much turns on it :-) [[User:Hout\|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout\|talk]]) 15:40, 4 April 2019 (UTC)