On 01/06/2013 08:38 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Neil Toronto wrote:
Last time I checked Hari's RAList implementation, it was broken, so I
started my own from scratch (which is what I worked from just now). He's
fixed it, though. I could run some benchmarks, bu
On Jan 6, 2013, at 10:38 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> Is the use of index types a fundamental refactoring, or something that
> could be added to Hari's code?
>
> I ask because having 3+ different functional random-access data
> structures seems like a loss for Racket code interoperability o
On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Neil Toronto wrote:
> Thanks for the pointers!
>
> I can't use David Van Horn's because it's untyped, and I need to use this in
> Typed Racket.
Well, you might consider porting his code to Typed Racket. I hear it
was designed for that. ;)
> Last time I checked Ha
Thanks for the pointers!
I can't use David Van Horn's because it's untyped, and I need to use
this in Typed Racket. (No polymorphic, opaque types, and if I use the
`struct' form in `require/typed', I'd get the performance problems I
just wrote about on the dev list.)
Last time I checked Hari
On Fri, 4 Jan 2013, Neil Toronto wrote:
I expect lookups and in-place updates with the most frequency. The other
operation I need to be fast is head or tail insertion (it doesn't matter
which), but not nearly as much as the other two. Have I picked the right data
structure?
How long are the
I expect lookups and in-place updates with the most frequency. The other
operation I need to be fast is head or tail insertion (it doesn't matter
which), but not nearly as much as the other two. Have I picked the right
data structure?
Neil ⊥
On 01/04/2013 06:39 PM, Jeremiah Willcock wrote:
H
How long are these lists going to be, and how many insertions/deletions
will occur relative to the number of element lookups and in-place updates?
Would it make sense to consider other random-access data structures (in
particular, growable vectors) instead of lists?
-- Jeremiah Willcock
On Fr
My doctoral research is to beat the crap out of STAN, WinBUGS, etc.,
etc., by leveraging information you can only get by writing a compiler
for a language with a formal definition.
There's no Bayesian DSL that can answer queries with arbitrary
conditions like "X^2+Y^2 = 1.2". MCMC fails specta
MCMC with Gibbs Sampling and MH for straightforward stuff is
straightforward, but the subtitles of underflow, use log space or not etc
are something you guys know quite a bit more about than I do.
FWIW, a few months ago I was doing some custom Racket coded for
straightforward Gibbs (mainly) and MH
So maybe I should just have a smaller size bound? (the 10 in the 'gen-exp'
function)
Really, perhaps, what I should do is not have a smaller size bound but
instead just make the number of tests I do (32 in the currently pushed
thing) depend on how long I've been testing.
Robby
On Fri, Jan 4, 20
On 01/04/2013 03:06 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
Very cool! I've run into this problem a few times.
And here's an example where it happens right now
http://drdr.racket-lang.org/26021/collects/tests/future/random-future.rkt
Yeah, your problem is very similar. The difference is that in my case
Very cool! I've run into this problem a few times.
And here's an example where it happens right now
http://drdr.racket-lang.org/26021/collects/tests/future/random-future.rkt
Robby
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Neil Toronto wrote:
> I get excited about applying statistics to programmin
Have you tried testing your implementation against either David Van
Horn's implementation (not in TR) [1], or Hari's implementation (in
TR) [2]? Or against VLists (also in Hari's PFDs package)?
[1] https://github.com/dvanhorn/ralist
[2] https://github.com/takikawa/tr-pfds/tree/master/data/ralist
I get excited about applying statistics to programming. Here's something
exciting I found today.
I'm working on a Typed Racket implementation of Chris Okasaki's purely
functional random-access lists, which are O(1) for `cons', `first' and
`rest', and basically O(log(n)) for random access. I wa
14 matches
Mail list logo
