You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In the C version, I have added some code to break out the time by phases:
I/O time 300.913000
qsort time 26.050000
tree building time 60.848000
printing time 591.108000
Total elapsed time 979.010000
I will be making a couple of changes to how I label these, but I am leaning toward this:
I/O + parsing time 300.913000
qsort time 26.050000 <-- This only applies to the C version.
tree building time 60.848000 <-- you'd probably use the word map here.
process tree generation/printing time 591.108000
Total elapsed time 979.010000
I'm assuming all of this can be done with Scala meter. I think this would also help us to see how well various languages do with their idiomatic I/O. I've always felt that Java I/O gets a bad rap. With its buffered abstractions, it should do in theory. Ditto for Scala.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In the C version, I have added some code to break out the time by phases:
I/O time 300.913000
qsort time 26.050000
tree building time 60.848000
printing time 591.108000
Total elapsed time 979.010000
I will be making a couple of changes to how I label these, but I am leaning toward this:
I/O + parsing time 300.913000
qsort time 26.050000 <-- This only applies to the C version.
tree building time 60.848000 <-- you'd probably use the word map here.
process tree generation/printing time 591.108000
Total elapsed time 979.010000
I'm assuming all of this can be done with Scala meter. I think this would also help us to see how well various languages do with their idiomatic I/O. I've always felt that Java I/O gets a bad rap. With its buffered abstractions, it should do in theory. Ditto for Scala.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: