Anonymous user
Talk:Word wrap: Difference between revisions
→REXX Timings: possible discrepancy. -- ~~~~
m (→REXX Timings: corrected a misspelling. -- ~~~~) |
(→REXX Timings: possible discrepancy. -- ~~~~) |
||
Line 207:
The last shown REXX program has a problem with classic REXX: '''fn''' is an unknown function. Also, that REXX program only reads the first record of the file (does exactly one read) instead of doing a loop until done. It would make more sense to exclude the time to read the file as well as bypassing the writing of the records to the file, as the I/O would be unvarying and slightly dependant on other I/O activity in the system, not to mention caching. Whoever does the first reading pays for all the I/O, the 2nd reading would be from cache. I would benchmark for a paragraph of text as the task says, not a million bytes. Scale up the number of executions to make the timings meaningful. Also, I took the liberty of breaking up the listing of the REXX programs into separate sections, perhaps it would be a good idea to label/identify them, not to mention to bring version 0 and 1 up to date. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 21:01, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
-----
I seemed to found a discrepancy. For an input of:
<pre>
────────── Computer programming laws ──────────
The Primal Scenario -or- Basic Datum of Experience:
∙ Systems in general work poorly or not at all.
∙ Nothing complicated works.
∙ Complicated systems seldom exceed 5% efficiency.
∙ There is always a fly in the ointment.
</pre>
The REXX versions 0 and 1 produce:
<pre>
────────── Computer programming laws
────────── The Primal Scenario -or-
Basic Datum of Experience: ∙ Systems in
general work poorly or not at all. ∙
Nothing complicated works. ∙ Complicated
systems seldom exceed 5% efficiency. ∙
There is always a fly in the ointment.
</pre>
The REXX version 2 (modified for my timings) produces:
<pre>
────────── Computer programming
laws ────────── The Primal Scenario
-or- Basic Datum of Experience: ∙
Systems in general work poorly or not at
all. ∙ Nothing complicated works.
∙ Complicated systems seldom exceed 5%
efficiency. ∙ There is always a fly
in the ointment.
</pre>
It seems that the REXX version 2 isn't handling leading or imbedded blanks. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 21:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
| |||