I have little doubt that K outperforms J in CPU speed, especially where it specializes - data manipulation.
Maybe everyone else is a better programmer than I am but I've found the biggest bottleneck to getting any process done usually sits between the chair and the keyboard. On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Joe Bogner <[email protected]> wrote: > > Not to nitpick here, but I don't think we can draw any conclusions on > > the number of characters or even the number of operations (since each > > composed of a conjunction and verb) > > Oh, certainly. > > 4x was a ceiling. I doubt even 1x is a floor (because it depends on > what else is happening). > > > I can cut down on the code size factor if I wanted to: > > > > E=:&.> > > 1 + E (1;2;3) > > > > I don't think that's the right metric though. > > Yep. Need to get into the actual problem being solved before you can > approach it reasonably. > > > I'm also not so sure we can say with certainty that K's each is faster > > than J's without some testing. It's probably true that is doing more > > work but the extra work may be inconsequential. > > And sometimes the extra work is beneficial. Sometimes you need the > things which K has left out. > > The language is almost never the entire application. > > But I guess the real point is that there's going to be some cases > where one language has an advantage, other cases where a different > language has an advantage and a lot of cases where the language is not > the most important issue. > > Thanks, > > -- > Raul > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > -- Devon McCormick, CFA Quantitative Consultant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
