Talk:Word wrap: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
m (→REXX Timings: corrected a misspelling. -- ~~~~) |
(→REXX Timings: possible discrepancy. -- ~~~~) |
||
Line 207: | Line 207: | ||
The last shown REXX program has a problem with classic REXX: '''fn''' is an unknown function. Also, that REXX program only reads the first record of the file (does exactly one read) instead of doing a loop until done. It would make more sense to exclude the time to read the file as well as bypassing the writing of the records to the file, as the I/O would be unvarying and slightly dependant on other I/O activity in the system, not to mention caching. Whoever does the first reading pays for all the I/O, the 2nd reading would be from cache. I would benchmark for a paragraph of text as the task says, not a million bytes. Scale up the number of executions to make the timings meaningful. Also, I took the liberty of breaking up the listing of the REXX programs into separate sections, perhaps it would be a good idea to label/identify them, not to mention to bring version 0 and 1 up to date. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 21:01, 21 August 2013 (UTC) |
The last shown REXX program has a problem with classic REXX: '''fn''' is an unknown function. Also, that REXX program only reads the first record of the file (does exactly one read) instead of doing a loop until done. It would make more sense to exclude the time to read the file as well as bypassing the writing of the records to the file, as the I/O would be unvarying and slightly dependant on other I/O activity in the system, not to mention caching. Whoever does the first reading pays for all the I/O, the 2nd reading would be from cache. I would benchmark for a paragraph of text as the task says, not a million bytes. Scale up the number of executions to make the timings meaningful. Also, I took the liberty of breaking up the listing of the REXX programs into separate sections, perhaps it would be a good idea to label/identify them, not to mention to bring version 0 and 1 up to date. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 21:01, 21 August 2013 (UTC) |
||
----- |
|||
I seemed to found a discrepancy. For an input of: |
|||
<pre> |
|||
────────── Computer programming laws ────────── |
|||
The Primal Scenario -or- Basic Datum of Experience: |
|||
∙ Systems in general work poorly or not at all. |
|||
∙ Nothing complicated works. |
|||
∙ Complicated systems seldom exceed 5% efficiency. |
|||
∙ There is always a fly in the ointment. |
|||
</pre> |
|||
The REXX versions 0 and 1 produce: |
|||
<pre> |
|||
────────── Computer programming laws |
|||
────────── The Primal Scenario -or- |
|||
Basic Datum of Experience: ∙ Systems in |
|||
general work poorly or not at all. ∙ |
|||
Nothing complicated works. ∙ Complicated |
|||
systems seldom exceed 5% efficiency. ∙ |
|||
There is always a fly in the ointment. |
|||
</pre> |
|||
The REXX version 2 (modified for my timings) produces: |
|||
<pre> |
|||
────────── Computer programming |
|||
laws ────────── The Primal Scenario |
|||
-or- Basic Datum of Experience: ∙ |
|||
Systems in general work poorly or not at |
|||
all. ∙ Nothing complicated works. |
|||
∙ Complicated systems seldom exceed 5% |
|||
efficiency. ∙ There is always a fly |
|||
in the ointment. |
|||
</pre> |
|||
It seems that the REXX version 2 isn't handling leading or imbedded blanks. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 21:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC) |