OpenEuphoria

RE: $100 Contest Question

• Posted by bensler at mail.com Mar 04, 2002
• 555 views

Grr, I DID test before I said anything, to be sure. But I double 
checkled, and the values aren't the same :(
I'll have to see if I can still do it.

Like Derek said though, I don't see the purpose of using that table.
What does it matter what the first letter of each word is?
Only a minute set of circumstances would benefit from it.

Chris

euman at bellsouth.net wrote:
> Chris are you sure the output is the same (hash table values)?
> 
> If not I would say that the table lookup speed might differ.
> 
> Right now, the table lookup is 100's time faster than reading in the
> "words.txt" and creating the table. 
> 
> reading and creating the table is 0.60 sec (233mhz) FAST
> imagine what the lookup will be on say a 15000 word .txt file
> like Junkos spell checker is timed at (2 sec)
> 
> Im saying the spellchecker could be @ 1 sec for the same using
> EumsHash( ) but this is just a guestament.
> 
> Euman
> euman at bellsouth.net
> 
> Q: Are we monetarily insane?
> A: YES
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <bensler at mail.com>
> To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 5:47 PM
> Subject: RE: $100 Contest Question
> 
> 
> > I got it down to 0.11 with minor tweaks, I think I can get it even 
> > faster. :)
> > 
> > Chris
> > 
> > euman at bellsouth.net wrote:
> > > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > > From: "Derek Parnell" <ddparnell at bigpond.com>
> > > To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Euman's hashtable runs at 1.16 but I tweaked that a lot and got it to 
> > > > run at
> > > > 0.22
> > > 
> > > Yes you did, thanks BIG D
> > > 
> > > When "I" changed this: 
> > > h *= 16
> > > 
> > > to this:
> > > h *= 3 -- which doesnt give as Unique a value as before but is still 
> > > very effective.
> > > 
> > > The routine was @250% faster bringing the time from 3.5 sec on my 233mhz 
> > > 
> > > to 1.1 sec 
> > > This is the routine I was talking about sharing in a month or so.
> > > 
> > > But when BIG D convinced me that getc( ) would shave another 0.25 sec 
> > > off the load time.
> > > I was impressed. He also went a few steps further and now EumsHash runs 
> > > in at 0.60 sec
> > > on my 233mhz laptop ( at 200mhz desk). I can imagine figures on PIII 500
> > > or
> > > 
> > > higher machine 
> > > being (0.0something) or better now. 
> > > 
> > > Prolly could beat Junko's Spellchecker I havent coded this so Im not 
> > > sure.
> > > 
> > > sure is BLAZING FAST!
> > > 
> > > Euman
> > > 
> > >