Hi rebOldes,
On Tuesday, December 16, 2003, 6:09:34 PM, you wrote:
r I can, but it's much more slower and it would mean to make it
r completely again. Maybe I could use load/next but how to convert
r invalid word to word?
to word! whatever you wish
== whatever you wish
to word! 1,4
== 1,4
Hi Anton,
On Wednesday, December 17, 2003, 3:00:06 PM, you wrote:
AR do select reduce [
AR event/shift [...]
AR event/control [...]
AR true [...] ; default
AR ] true
any [
if event/shift [... true]
if event/control [... true]
(...)
Hi Jason,
On Wednesday, December 17, 2003, 3:19:18 PM, you wrote:
JC Simple includes not having to write the book first or explain it to anyone.
[...]
Don't confuse simple with easy! And, of course, most times one
is going to do what's easier, not what's simpler... but that
doesn't mean
On 18-Dec-03, Gabriele Santilli wrote:
Hi rebOldes,
On Tuesday, December 16, 2003, 6:09:34 PM, you wrote:
I can, but it's much more slower and it would mean to make it
completely again. Maybe I could use load/next but how to convert
invalid word to word?
to word! whatever you wish
==
Hi Konstantin,
On Wednesday, December 17, 2003, 5:14:02 PM, you wrote:
KK Rebol: 18 seconds
KK h: make hash! []
KK start: now/time
KK n: 10
KK for i 1 n 1 [
KK append h i
KK ]
KK print [Elapsed time for n records (now/time - start)]
h: make hash! 12
== make hash! []
start:
Thank you very much to all who helps me to improve
Rebol API to DyBASE.
I am sorry that somebody treat my concerns about hash tables
in Rebol as criticism of this language.
I already understand that make hash! 10 is much more efficient
than make hash! [] and loop N is faster than for 1 N 1.
Hi, Stan,
Welcome to the list!
Stan Silver wrote:
Greetings,
1. Are mail list threads determined only by the subject? In other words,
can I add my two cents to an existing topic just by typing in the correct
subject? Or do I have to reply to an existing email? Does Re: matter in
the
Maybe you will want to use this. You can add /case to the find to
make it faster for strings.
; -- script: %hash.r
REBOL [
title: hash
author: Frank Sievertsen
; version: 1.0.0
purpose: {
Hash-Test
-
hash! -
Thanks Joel, I think this is just what I need.
I don't think pif is a good name for it, though, it reminds
me of obscure unix commands, not very rebolish.
But what is a good name?
Perhaps something like reselect (because it's a bit
like a select reduce, but since that's not strictly true,
then
REBOL: others define code, rebol expresses it
hmm... I like it
Can you explain the difference between 'define' and 'express' please?
- Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
Hi Konstantin,
KK I am sorry that somebody treat my concerns about hash tables
KK in Rebol as criticism of this language.
Not to worry. We've been through many of these discussions before
ourselves. I'll second what Gabriele said.
-- Gregg
--
To unsubscribe from this
Hi Bryan,
b I'm wondering if anyone has done anything with parsing .msg files with
b Rebol.
b Instead of using Parse I was thinking (this probably sounds crazy) that
b it might be possible to open a port and feed it .msg files, perhaps
b inheriting Rebol's normal understanding of smtp.
Hello Konstantin,
Looks there is no profiler in Rebol:(
So, I have to do profiling myself using now/time/precise.
I got the following results which seems to be interesting:
Elapsed time for inserting 10 records: 0:01:01
Elapsed time for performing 20 index searches: 0:02:06
Time spent
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 14:37:03 +0300
Konstantin Knizhnik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is why I need to profile the execution of the
program.
Hi Konstantin,
This is great work that you're doing. We shouldn't look a
gift horse in the mouth!
Unfortunately I had no profiler, because I have no
Hi Konstantin,
KK So, during index search 1.5 minutes from 2 were spent in lookup
KK function. And 14 seconds takes searching index itself.
KK From these 1.5 minutes most of the time was spent in this line:
KK obj: select obj-by-oid-map oid
A quick test seems to show that the SELECT part
Hello Gregg,
I was able to isolate the problem.
The following script shows almost the same time as testindex.r
searching for 20 objects.
n: 20
h: make hash! n
start: now/time/precise
repeat i n [
oid: random n
obj: select h oid
if none? obj [
obj: make object!
I improve my own record.
Looks like the best solution (not only for this example) is:
n: 20
h: make hash! 101
cache-size: 101
cache-used: 0
start: now/time/precise
repeat i n [
oid: random n
obj: select h oid
if none? obj [
obj: make object! [__oid__: oid]
if
Greetings,
Thank you for the quick replies to my mailing list questions. Here is my
attempt at a dictionary/hash table. It has already gone through one cleanup
after looking at a similar hash table somewhere (??? maybe in one of the
Rebol libraries) so some of the ideas are not mine.
And I'm
Hi,
I was able to isolate the problem.
The following script shows almost the same time as testindex.r
searching for 20 objects.
n: 20
h: make hash! n
start: now/time/precise
repeat i n [
oid: random n
obj: select h oid
if none? obj [
obj: make object!
Hi Joel,
I think, that:
1) Konstantin tries to use an Associative Array. I doubt, that the
suggested implementation is the best one.
INSERTs into a fresh hash (created each time with MAKE HASH! []):
Appears to be increasing faster than quadratically!
# eltsseconds ratio quad
20 matches
Mail list logo
