153000+ entries in 0.099s
phf: i suspect
that ffa's
take on expmod is
to iterate over every bigit of
the exponent, which will have
to perform base operations no matter what
the numeric size is, but
that's a guess.
phf: well, it's conveniently
two strategies: closed form solutions and constant iterators. if you don't have a closed form solution, you have
to iterate, which you simply do at
the upper bound constraint by a data
type size. i don't see how
theoretically it can be anything else
mircea_popescu: you're not having any of
this new fangled "constant
time ~= fixedtime ie, variable
time running at worst case" ?
phf: i guess
the point of
this exercise is
to show
that iteration sizes further leak
timing information
phf: mircea_popescu: well he either has a constant
time algorithm in ffa, in which case if
the goal is
to compare speed specifically we should be comparing fixtime ffa and fixtime something else. otherwise he has a variable
time algorithm running at worst case constant
time, in which case
the comparison is between base operation speed, which is still going
to come out on
top
mircea_popescu: phf his point is
that if you're going
to compare fixtime with something else, better make sure you get a long case in
there
too.
phf: asciilifeform: wait,
that seems like a cheap sleight of hand. obviously increasing number of iterations in an iterative algorithm
that you gave is going
to increase run
time
☟︎ shinohai: Anyone have
the lisp version handy?
mod6: and same version of py
there
too. ok just a sec.
mod6: im gonna
try it on
the build-donkey box, core2duo/4gb
mod6: (fwiw,
that machine I just ran it on has Python 2.7.9)
mod6: <+asciilifeform> out of curiosity, how long
the py item
takes on mod6's box ? << was just saving... lemme give it a
try here. want me
to
try it on
the i5/8gb box ?
mod6: sweet. is pretty interesting
tho.
mod6: yeah, something simple like
this is a good starting spot.
mod6: (other
than
the ffa-fact, which i use sometimes
to
try new, whole, ffa parts out)
mod6: mainly, I read
through
them. because,
there's still a lot for me
to grok here. and it's easy
to fool oneself into groking if you
treat it like a blackbox instead of actually reading
the code.
mod6: ah, ok. and yah, no need
to let p out of
the garage until ffa is pretty much "there".
mod6: im basically going
to have
to do
this anyway --
this helps "fitting in mod6
mod6: i'd like
to also maybe make some unit
tests around your procedures/functions.
mod6: aha, one similar
to
that. although, indeed,
that works
too.
a111: Logged on 2017-10-02 19:31 asciilifeform: note also
that
the calling style from early versions will not work,
there is no longer a .Z , FZ is not a struct any moar, it is just a word array
mod6: i
think ima make a quick one for myself just so i can see what youre sayin on stuff like
that.
mod6: btw, do you have a simple
test harness setup for
this just
to assert some known output values?
mircea_popescu: so im
trying out being 70s, what. do you want me
to go in unaware, end up surprised by it ?
mod6: 2.107 shows extended euclid
that yields greatest common divisor d of
two integers a and b, but also integers x and y satisfying ax + by = d
mod6: 2.103: FACT If a and b are positive integers with a > b,
then gcd(a, b) = gcd(b, a mod b)
mod6: (for
those who don't have
the
text handy)
mod6: yeah, i read
the
thread a few
times.
mod6 also looking forward
to apeloyee's pseudocode
a111: Logged on 2017-10-07 01:36 mircea_popescu:
today for eg, felt like walk, but didn't feel like climbing 20% inclines, so had girl
take me
to park. 20km driven
to walk 3 or so. imagine
the decay.
mod6: her haggard old bag of a mom didn't approve? or did i dream
this up?
mod6: didn't some lady
throw some snizz your way one day while walkin by?
a111: Logged on 2017-05-18 16:44 asciilifeform: 'not ivan, but pyotr, and not won, but lost, and not
the lottery, but at cards'
mod6: alf's suits must look pretty good
though. i mean, he's out
there walkin'
through georgetown and rando frauleins are flashin
their
twat at him.
mod6: yeah, hard
to find
the right pace sometimes.
mircea_popescu: yet it was you know... 6km maybe ? piddly squat, until you consider it climbed maybe 6-700m over
that distance.
mod6: especially if it rains a lot
too.
mircea_popescu: today for eg, felt like walk, but didn't feel like climbing 20% inclines, so had girl
take me
to park. 20km driven
to walk 3 or so. imagine
the decay.
☟︎ mircea_popescu: used
to. i suppose
this place being ~a village doesn't help.
mod6: mircea_popescu: ah,
that's about where i'm at I suppose. i have it in my mind
that you do
the ba walk nearly daily...
mod6: well, if you walk for 2/3h per day, maybe don't
think of
them as "shoes". perhaps, "proper foot equipment" or something.
mircea_popescu: mod6 anyway, i'm not a young man anymore. i maybe do 10km a week
these days, if
that.
a111: Logged on 2016-01-07 01:58 asciilifeform: relative of mine once
took - very worn - pair of american shit-shoes
to an old ru emigre shoemaker, asked 'what he could do.'
the wizened master replied: 'i can
throw
these out for you'
mod6: i've worn out one pair,
they
took 'em back for $100 and re-soled
them.
mircea_popescu: generally, gift extra used pairs
to
the help when moving out.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform consider : i've yet
to
throw out a pair of shoes because ~broken~.
mod6: certainly a lot better
than
the $100 shitters.
mircea_popescu: they're nice
though, a brazillian
take on
the longwing brogue
mod6: the pairs i have are
this cork
that molds
to my feet. which feel pretty good day
to day. but i walk like 10% of what you do.
mod6: ah, i bet
the gel is nice.
mod6: wearing concrete blocks on my feet is for
the birds.
mod6: can wear suits everyday, and walk
the mile or
two
that I need
to every day and still be ~fine~.
mod6: pretty nice
to walk in 'eh?
mircea_popescu: so i bought
this five bitcent pair of "finest brazillian shoes".