On Aug 1, 2005, at 4:52 PM, Alejandro Forero Cuervo wrote:
That explains Chicken's pathetic performance in the spellcheck
benchmark in the alioth shootout (
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/benchmark.php?
test=spellcheck&lang=all&sort=fullcpu
) - dead last, at 35.4 seconds, compared to 16.9 seconds for the next
slowest language. It's writing and reading ~39000 entries into a
10000 size hash table, with this dumb algorithm.
That's probably right. I suppose currently it performs (39000 -
500) / 101 = 337 resizes, whereas with the change it would resize
the table from 10000 to 39709 and then to 79423, just 3 resizes. :)
_The Practice of Programming_ (Kernighan & Pike) deals with a
situation analgous to this; they grow storage for a string by powers
of two. This works well because it heavily tests the algorithm --
from 1 to 2 to 4 to 8... -- but also causes a grow for every log n
inserts i.e. rarely.
Ed
--
Transmogrify, LLC * <http://xmog.com/>
_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
