[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Good way to code the equivalent to this?
From: |
Matt Welland |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Good way to code the equivalent to this? |
Date: |
Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:22:17 -0700 |
Thanks all for the various workarounds. The ones I understand I will
try. The others I'll study :-)
My test results were as follows (this is with 300,000 entries -
closer to what my current problem is hitting):
chicken: ~16 secs (when it didn't crash)
stk: ~17 secs
ruby: ~1.3 secs
perl: ~0.7 secs
By the by the tactic of loading lots of data into a hierarchy of hash
arrays and then extracting the needed pieces in a myriad of ways,
sometimes on the fly in a meeting with management nervously looking on
:-) has been tremendously useful for me. I for one am hoping that
there are faster hash tables in the future of chicken.
- Re: [Chicken-users] Good way to code the equivalent to this?, (continued)
- Re: [Chicken-users] Good way to code the equivalent to this?, Elf, 2008/08/24
- Re: [Chicken-users] Good way to code the equivalent to this?, Elf, 2008/08/24
- Re: [Chicken-users] Good way to code the equivalent to this?, Jim Ursetto, 2008/08/24
- Re: [Chicken-users] Good way to code the equivalent to this?,
Matt Welland <=
- Re: [Chicken-users] Good way to code the equivalent to this?, Tobia Conforto, 2008/08/25