Shawn P. Garbett
Tue, 13 Aug 2002 13:43:05 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tuesday 13 August 2002 01:37 pm, you wrote:
> > I would like to compare the three in terms of reductions, memory
> > usage, and overall big O complexity.
> I wouldn't use number of reductions as a guide if I was you.
Number of reductions does make a difference in this case, because it's a
simple test problem with three equivalent implementations (in the same
compiler). Nothing to create confusion like a system call, well actually all
three solutions must call a set of IO calls in the same order. So I think it
would make a good baseline comparison. I do agree that it's not a good
general measurement of efficiency, and really doesn't reflect the scalability
of the solution either (whereas big O notation would). Thanks for the heads
The other tips and hints you gave me are exactly what I was looking for. No I
just need a huge data set to pump into so it does a significant amount of
garbage collection, and memory management...
You're in a maze of twisty little statements, all alike.
Public Key available from http://www.garbett.org/public-key
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----