Anonymous user
Talk:Ordered words: Difference between revisions
m
→A bug (which was not really a bug) in Rexx solution: had to use PRE to force proper formatting. -- ~~~~
m (→A bug (which was not really a bug) in Rexx solution: minor edit change on a phrase. -- ~~~~) |
m (→A bug (which was not really a bug) in Rexx solution: had to use PRE to force proper formatting. -- ~~~~) |
||
Line 233:
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:
<pre>
oneliner: 10000001 13.088000
Procedure: 10000001 60.223000
</pre>
Then, just to show what the REXX overhead is for processing a "normal" '''do''' loop, I replaced the
<lang rexx>do i=1 to 10000000</lang>
Line 243:
do i</lang>
and the results are:
<pre>
oneliner: 10000001 13.412000
Procedure: 10000001 60.061000
</pre>
Considering that the bulk of the execution time is spent in the subroutines, it's noteworthy; the difference is the way REXX handles incrementing a '''do''' loop index (and testing for termination of same).
Line 300:
return translate(a) /* translate lowercase letters */</lang>
and the results were:
<pre>
version: REXX-Regina_3.6(MT) 5.00 31 Dec 2011
Line 307:
oneliner: 10000001 15.420000
Procedure: 10000001 63.106000
</pre>
<br>More work should be done on the benchmark REXX program(s), but there's only so much time in a day... -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 20:53, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
| |||