5 ms·

Thanks for the explanation. I think he's totally wrong though, and could have just overridden whatever setting he was unhappy with in his own program. It seems

by jsnell 16y ago

Thanks for the explanation. I think he's totally wrong though, and could have just overridden whatever setting he was unhappy with in his own program. It seems crazy to pessimize every other program for the sake of one solution though, especially when the approach taken is considered cheating and the solution marked as "interesting alternative". And no criticism implied on the Shootout maintainers, I'm sure that dealing with the submitters is like herding cats :-)

igouy 16y ago
Alexey Voznyuk contributed several Lisp programs, and a couple still show as the fastest Lisp program - maybe you can do better? (The project name changed nearly 4 years ago http://groups.google.com/group/haskell-cafe/msg/61e427146c8d7ab4?hl=en&pli=1 http://groups.google.com/group/haskell-cafe/msg/61e427146c8d...)
- jsnell 16y ago
  I did years ago, and a few of them still seem to be around. But won't be doing it again both due to reasons we have discussed before, and because the implementations seem to have totally dived off the deep end of complexity by now, and don't really look like they'd be much fun anymore.
  - igouy 16y ago
    Yes there are several that include a credit to you in the source code comments. The last program Alexey Voznyuk contributed seemed mostly to be inline assembler with a hint of Lisp - off the deep end :-)
  - igouy 16y ago
    Well for fun you might do want no one else has done, and contribute a Lisp program for meteor-contest - solve as you please, there's no cat herding for that one http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64q/performance.php?test=meteor#about http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64q/performance.php?test=...