Re: Function Points

From	Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: Function Points
References	(14 earlier) <7xwr0d8xab.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> <2000935.ViCZX3HiHH@sunwukong.fritz.box> <7x8vctqvbh.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> <3682218.RpYgJoRDKP@sunwukong.fritz.box> <5883549.frr9YTnbEn@sunwukong.fritz.box>
Date	2012-09-02 15:02 -0700
Message-ID	<7xsjb0krr2.fsf@ruckus.brouhaha.com> (permalink)
Organization	Nightsong/Fort GNOX

Show all headers | View raw

Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> writes:
>> I've written a binary heap ...  The main source of bugs was that all
>> more detailed descriptions count from 1..n, while Forth of course
>> counts from 0..n-1. 

Thanks, this is cool.  Note the Python implementation I linked to 
also uses 0..n-1, IIRC.

> here's the benchmarking stuff.
>                binary heap  linear "heap"
>   10 inserts      17,666ns        9,287ns
>   10 deletes      15,941ns        6,960ns

By now I've forgotten just what is being timed, what the expected and
maximum plausible N's are in the application, and whether inserts are
more common than deletes or vice versa.

>  256 inserts     164,048ns      452,609ns
>  256 deletes     476,276ns      251,134ns

At N=256 assuming that there's one insert for each delete, the binary
heap is using 640,234ns and the linear heap is using 703,743, so in that
situation (don't know if it's realistic) the binary heap is winning
slightly.

> heap doesn't pay off significantly at 256 item, and I don't fully 
> understand why the deletes are so slow...

Some profiling might help. 

> You can look at the files here
> https://fossil.net2o.de/net2o/dir?ci=tip

I'll look at it later, I can't easily right now.

> The binary heap part has a bit more overhead by using mini-oof.fs to 
> improve possible code reusage (this *is* necessary, as you don't want to 
> use cut&paste "template" programming here),

I'd expect it's possible to do automatic template-style instantiation
with suitable Forth hackery but I don't have a sense of whether it would
help.  It might be interesting to run the benchmark with one of the
optimizing Forth compilers that does inlining.

> Some people say that modern x86 CPUs are tuned to bad code, and that
> seems to include bad algorithms ;-).

I typed "cache-oblivious priority queue" into a search engine and
got a lot of promising-looking hits, but haven't looked at any yet.

> As long as we have less than 256 elements in our priority queue, I
> would go with the O(n²) algorithm. 

It's not just that N is small but also that comparisons are cheap.
With more expensive comparisons (e.g. you are dealing with more
complicated structures, like in external merge sorting) I'd expect the
crossover to be at lower N.

> I'd say that using an O(n log n) algorithm for a data set that you
> don't expect to be that large is premature optimization.

If you're writing a general purpose library, it has to be able to handle
large N sensibly, so it needs to offer the O(log n) algorithm either
way.  So your choice is between using that algorithm for everything, or
also having a separate one optimized for small N.  In this case I'd say
writing two implementations without a demonstrated need is premature
optimization.

> I do prefer quicksort over bubble sort,

Since you've got a binary heap implementation now, the obvious
sorting method is heapsort. ;-)

Thread

Comparative Productivity of Programming Languages visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-08-21 21:43 -0700
  Re: Comparative Productivity of Programming Languages "A. K." <akk@nospam.org> - 2012-08-22 07:07 +0200
  Re: Comparative Productivity of Programming Languages Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-08-22 03:35 -0500
    Re: Comparative Productivity of Programming Languages John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-08-22 14:06 -0700
      Function Points (was: Comparative Productivity of Programming Languages) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-08-23 14:50 +0000
        Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-23 11:43 -0700
          Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-08-25 14:13 +0000
            Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-25 10:12 -0700
              Re: Function Points Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-08-25 15:39 -0400
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-25 15:09 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-08-25 12:34 -1000
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-25 16:43 -0700
                Re: Function Points jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-08-25 18:05 -0700
                Re: Function Points jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-08-25 20:34 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-08-26 03:24 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-25 22:44 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-08-25 21:19 -1000
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-26 00:36 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-08-25 21:50 -1000
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-26 01:08 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-08-26 23:20 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-26 19:33 -0700
                Re: Function Points Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-08-27 13:34 -0500
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-08-27 22:38 +0200
                Re: Function Points Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-08-28 02:45 -0500
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-27 18:14 -0700
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-27 18:24 -0700
                Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-08-30 14:22 +0000
                Re: Function Points Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-08-28 03:07 -0500
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-28 08:18 -0700
                Re: Function Points Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-08-28 12:15 -0500
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-28 23:05 -0700
                Re: Function Points Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-08-29 03:55 -0500
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-08-27 22:28 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-27 20:26 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-08-28 23:17 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-29 01:13 -0700
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-29 02:23 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-08-30 02:59 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-29 22:18 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-08-30 20:44 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-31 01:29 -0700
                Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-08-31 09:33 +0000
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-08-30 02:58 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-29 19:39 -0700
                Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-08-30 14:10 +0000
                Re: Function Points gavino_himself <visploveslisp@gmail.com> - 2012-08-30 20:08 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-08-30 17:47 -1000
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-08-27 13:43 -1000
                Re: Function Points "Paul E. Bennett" <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2012-08-27 12:14 +0100
                Re: Function Points Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-27 05:12 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Paul E. Bennett" <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2012-08-27 15:52 +0100
                Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-08-26 13:09 +0000
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-27 20:52 -0700
                Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-08-30 14:08 +0000
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-30 10:43 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-08-30 08:25 -1000
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-08-30 22:42 +0200
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-08-31 01:23 -0400
                Re: Function Points Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-08-31 03:08 -0500
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-08-31 18:56 -0400
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-01 02:35 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-31 23:52 -0700
                Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-09-01 14:27 +0000
                Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-09-01 14:18 +0000
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-01 17:45 +0200
                Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-09-01 16:14 +0000
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-01 19:13 +0200
                Re: Function Points Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-09-02 03:19 -0500
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-01 16:18 -0400
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-02 03:04 +0200
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-02 04:02 -0400
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-02 17:40 +0200
                Re: Function Points jim@rainbarrel.com - 2012-09-02 10:32 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-02 20:49 +0200
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-02 16:33 -0400
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-02 17:03 -0400
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-09-02 09:02 -1000
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-02 16:35 -0400
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-09-02 13:42 -1000
                Re: Function Points jim@rainbarrel.com - 2012-09-02 16:54 -0700
                Re: Function Points Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-09-03 00:29 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-03 01:30 -0400
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-09-02 21:21 -1000
                Re: Function Points jim@rainbarrel.com - 2012-09-03 10:37 -0700
                Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-09-04 07:14 +0000
                Re: Function Points Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-09-03 21:12 +0200
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-03 17:32 -0400
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-03 17:51 -0400
                Re: Function Points John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-09-03 22:37 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-04 04:25 -0400
                Re: Function Points John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-09-04 07:35 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-05 02:13 -0400
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-09-04 20:18 -1000
                Re: Function Points John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-09-05 10:56 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-05 16:11 -0400
                Re: Function Points John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-09-05 14:07 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-02 16:27 -0400
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-03 00:52 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-02 16:28 -0700
                Re: Function Points jim@rainbarrel.com - 2012-09-02 16:48 -0700
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-02 20:21 -0400
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-09-02 14:45 -1000
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-03 01:12 -0400
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-09-02 21:26 -1000
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-03 01:06 -0400
                Re: Function Points Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-31 03:29 -0700
                Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-08-31 10:35 +0000
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-08-31 18:49 -0400
                Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-09-01 14:49 +0000
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-09-01 08:36 -1000
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-01 16:11 -0400
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-03 01:58 +0200
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-01 17:54 +0200
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-01 16:19 -0400
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-02 03:05 +0200
                Re: Function Points Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-08-31 23:10 +0200
                Re: Function Points "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-08-31 15:50 -1000
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-01 10:31 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-01 21:52 +0200
                Re: Function Points "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-09-01 16:36 -0400
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-01 14:36 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-02 03:30 +0200
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-02 23:15 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-02 15:02 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-03 01:50 +0200
                Re: Function Points jim@rainbarrel.com - 2012-09-02 16:57 -0700
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 23:11 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-04 14:30 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-04 10:14 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-04 22:10 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-06 00:19 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-06 17:48 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-06 12:01 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-06 22:02 +0200
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-06 14:19 -0700
                Heap (was: Function Points) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-09-07 11:30 +0000
                Re: Heap (was: Function Points) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-07 18:12 +0200
                Re: Heap (was: Function Points) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-09-07 16:48 +0000
                Re: Heap (was: Function Points) Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-07 21:34 +0200
                Re: Heap Gerry Jackson <gerry@jackson9000.fsnet.co.uk> - 2012-09-07 22:04 +0100
                Re: Heap anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-09-08 11:52 +0000
                Re: Heap Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-08 22:48 +0200
                Re: Heap (was: Function Points) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-09-08 12:11 +0000
                priority queue (was: Function Points) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-09-03 11:46 +0000
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-03 15:03 +0200
                Re: Function Points mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2012-09-03 22:36 +0200
                Re: Function Points mhx@iae.nl (Marcel Hendrix) - 2012-09-06 20:27 +0200
                Re: Function Points Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-09-02 04:00 -0500
                Re: Function Points visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-09-03 10:40 -0700
                Re: Function Points Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-09-03 20:26 +0200
                Re: Function Points Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-08-27 11:49 -0400
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-27 09:16 -0700
                Re: Function Points Josh Grams <josh@qualdan.com> - 2012-08-28 22:46 +0000
                Re: Function Points jacko <jackokring@gmail.com> - 2012-08-28 16:06 -0700
                Re: Function Points Doug Hoffman <glidedog@gmail.com> - 2012-08-28 20:50 -0400
              Re: Function Points anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-08-26 12:59 +0000
                Re: Function Points Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-08-26 22:24 -0700
        Re: Function Points (was: Comparative Productivity of Programming Languages) John Passaniti <john.passaniti@gmail.com> - 2012-08-23 15:02 -0700
          Re: Function Points (was: Comparative Productivity of Programming Languages) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-08-25 14:57 +0000
  Re: Comparative Productivity of Programming Languages "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@notemailnot.cmm> - 2012-08-22 08:07 -0400
    Re: Comparative Productivity of Programming Languages visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-08-22 08:12 -0700
  Re: Comparative Productivity of Programming Languages visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2012-08-22 07:37 -0700

csiph-web