> I should have also pointed out in your > by only having one benchmark you are going to miss out on the envelope > of use cases. >
Alex, thank you for all your comments, and other perspectives that you always bring to Ahmed's and everyones else's attention. I always imagine you as a "four-dimensional" engineer for the your unabashed presentation of out-of-the-box ideas. I actually truly like this, quite often, inspiring style. However, it seems to me that this last paragraph is a little unjust critique, and as if doesn't come from you. The report is not about a benchmark, it is about a script that does something. Ahmed never said "we are going to benchmark" anything. The program in the report is just an example used for illustration. And, now you say: it is not good for benchmarking. Well, no example is good for benchmarking, and, again, the report is not about benchmarking. Why do you mwntion benchmarking at all than? And what is Ahmed supposed to do? To flood the report with dozens of programs and dozens of tables, thousands of numbers, find some average - just to illustrate the script? The variety of test programs will be the subject of future reports. Otherwise, all intriguing and useful proposals from your side, and many thanks for them!! Yours, Aleksandar
