To balance my (a little trolling post), I must say that racket community is
very nice. Thanks to all that respond to the post.
I am interested in math, and I follow for example maxima, julia and R.
It should be wonderful if the new math library could be integrated in any way
with the symboli
Sam Tobin-Hochstadt writes:
>
> While you're certainly right about DrRacket introducing noise in
> performance measurement, I don't think you need to generate an
> executable to eliminate that overhead. Simply running `racket` from
> the command line on a file in a module ought to be sufficient
Veer Singh writes:
>
> I am getting 6.8 ms without modifying the code.
> When I change modulo to remainder I get 6.3 ms consistently.
I think you mean 6.8 seconds not milliseconds.
Try with the bigger n to remove transient behaviour.
Racket Users list:
http://lists
Pierpaolo Bernardi writes:
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 4:03 PM, daniel rupis
> wrote:
> >
> > I was comparing some code in Qi with that of sbcl, I posted a question in
> > comp.lang.lisp asking for a way to improve the perfomance, WJ gave a typed
> > racket
I was comparing some code in Qi with that of sbcl, I posted a question in
comp.lang.lisp asking for a way to improve the perfomance, WJ gave a typed
racket version that was slower than sbcl and also much slower than cpp.
Daniel Rupis wrote:
Note: The code compute the number of primes below
5 matches
Mail list logo
