From: Jim Menard <jimm@...>
Date: 2004-12-10T01:36:04+09:00
Subject: Re: [SUMMARY] Crosswords (#10)

trans. (T. Onoma) wrote:
> On Thursday 09 December 2004 10:52 am, Brian Schr�der wrote:
> | Well, you're right. I can't imagine anybody wants to solve a crossword of
> | the size whose layout would take noteworthy time to calculate. I only got
> | the feeling that all this transpose, gsub, etc... stuff should take a lot
> | of time. On the other hand ruby performance is nearly always different from
> | what I expect.
> 
> I don't expect mine to be anywhere near "fast" considering the approach I 
> took. But just for the sake of inquiry I put a quick benchmark together. 
> Should be trivial for others to fill in with their own. (see attached)
> 
> My Results:
> 
>   Tom's Solution 1000 runs:
>                        user     system      total        real
>   Default Layout:  3.390000   0.210000   3.600000 (  3.716914)
>     Jim's Layout: 21.490000   1.470000  22.960000 ( 23.339115)

Ouch. Of course, I don't plan to generate 1,000 crossword puzzles any time 
soon. I focused on elegant code, not needless optimizations :-)

Jim
-- 
Jim Menard, jimm@io.com, http://www.io.com/~jimm