Talk:Ordered words: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
m (→A bug (which was not really a bug) in Rexx solution: added a comment, made the 1/4 glyph into HTML friendly code.) |
|||
| Line 96: | Line 96: | ||
I dare not change your program. |
I dare not change your program. |
||
: The misspelling wasn't in the program, but the REXX language entry section header. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 23:06, 13 August 2016 (UTC) |
|||
: I had programmed the REXX example to expect a lexicographical ordered word list. I corrected the error. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 06:42, 14 July 2012 (UTC) |
: I had programmed the REXX example to expect a lexicographical ordered word list. I corrected the error. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 06:42, 14 July 2012 (UTC) |
||
| Line 230: | Line 231: | ||
I don't like to use words like ''mere'' which preloads a judgement. |
I don't like to use words like ''mere'' which preloads a judgement. |
||
30% of an 20 hour run is an extra |
30% of an 20 hour run is an extra <sup>'''1</sup>/<sub>4'''</sub> day (this would be in regards to that 82 million record "database"). |
||
I took your program ''as is'' and ran it on my isolated computer (no internet connection, no active anti-virus protection programs running, etc, it's a 3.20 GHz box and is running all four processors with five 100%-CPU-bound unrelated programs on below-normal priority), and the results are: |
I took your program ''as is'' and ran it on my isolated computer (no internet connection, no active anti-virus protection programs running, etc, it's a 3.20 GHz box and is running all four processors with five 100%-CPU-bound unrelated programs on below-normal priority), and the results are: |
||