Fastcode UpperCase B&V 3.0
- From: "Dennis" <marianndkc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 09:43:53 +0200
Hi All
I will try to make this release today.
For this to be possible we must decide upon the validity of the new
functions by Aleksandr. Do they allocate to much memory for the result
string? If yes - can we accept that?
Then we must select a solution to the problem that we measure a slowdown if
validation has been run before the benchmark. Possible solutions:
1) The cheap hack - do not allow benchmarking after validation.
2) Decrease loop counts in Validate 6 and 7 - validation becomes less
throrough.
3) Find the exact problem and the exact cure.
Then we must be sure that there are no problems regarding the benchmarking
order of functions.
We must also make sure that there is no problem regarding precision in
"Bechmark" versus "Benchmark All".
Then we must recheck the general precision and rework the benchmark if
needed.
Then we must find new subbenchmark weigths.
Best regards
Dennis
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Fastcode UpperCase B&V 3.0
- From: Dennis
- Re: Fastcode UpperCase B&V 3.0
- From: Dennis
- Re: Fastcode UpperCase B&V 3.0
- From: Pierre le Riche
- Re: Fastcode UpperCase B&V 3.0
- From: Dennis
- Re: Fastcode UpperCase B&V 3.0
- From: Dennis
- Re: Fastcode UpperCase B&V 3.0
- From: Aleksandr Sharahov
- Re: Fastcode UpperCase B&V 3.0
- Prev by Date: Re: Fastcode UpperCase B&V 2.8
- Next by Date: Re: Fastcode UpperCase B&V 2.8
- Previous by thread: New Rule Suggestion
- Next by thread: Re: Fastcode UpperCase B&V 3.0
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|