[ruby-talk:13910] Re: All In A Row?

I originally sent this to David offline, but he suggested
posting it. Some of his comments:

...
Interesting that our refactorings cancelled each other out :-)
My taste still runs to doing just the one loop, though I
certainly see your reasoning.  It would be interesting to
see what other people come up with too.

<End David's comments>

The rest of the message follows recommended ruby-talk
formatting. Sorry I do not know how to put this is a
mono-spaced font, hope it transmits well.

Hello --

>> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, John Kaurin wrote:

>> I made some modifications to the code supplied by
>> Pete Kernan [ruby-talk 13597]. Hope this is of
>> interest.
>>
>> # Re: [ruby-talk 13589, 13593, 13594, 13597]
>>
>> # Determines if an array's elements are in sequential
>> # order or the order specified by an optional block.
>>
>> class Array
>>   def seq?
>>     return true if length <= 1
>>     if block_given?
>>       (0..length-2).to_a.each do |i|
>>         return false unless yield (self[i]) == self[i + 1]
>>       end
>>       true
>>     else
>>       (0..length-2).to_a.each do |i|
>>         return false unless self[i].next == self[i + 1]
>>       end
>>       true
>>     end
>>   end
>> end

>You might want to refactor a little so that you don't have (almost)
>the same code twice.  Also you don't need to test for length, because
>if length <= 1 the do block won't be executed at all.  And you don't
>have to call #to_a on the range.  (Isn't that a song? :-)

>   class Array
>     def seq?
>       (0..length-2).each do |i|
>  return false unless self[i + 1] ==
>    if block_given?
>      yield self[i]
>    else
>      self[i].next
>    end
>       end
>       true
>     end
>   end


>David

Thanks for your suggestions. I was able to improve my code because of
them. Maybe that XP pair programming idea really works ;-) See method
seq3? in the code below for my new improvements.

My first cut at modifying Pete Kernan's example was code that almost
exactly matched yours. Then I refactored it :-) It seemed to me that
block_given? was being called needlessly for every iteration of the
loop, but did not relate to the loop or its function.

My gut said this was probably a performance issue for large arrays
so I moved the block_given? call outside the loop, which required
the appearance of duplication of code, but seemed inline with the
Refactoring way of thinking.

Anyway after seeing your suggestions I ran some actual testing to
see if it was my gut or just gas :-) Testing reports an approximate
10% improvement when block_given? is moved outside the loop for a
500,001 element array of integers, but I am not sure if that is
significant. I included test code and results below for your viewing
pleasure. Thanks in any case.

---------------------Cut Here--------------------------------------

class Array
  def seq1? # David Black's suggestion.
    (0..length-2).each do |i|
      return false unless self[i + 1] ==
      if block_given?
          yield self[i]
        else
          self[i].next
      end
    end
    true
  end
  def seq2? # Original post.
    return true if length <= 1
    if block_given?
      (0..length-2).each do |i|
        return false unless yield (self[i]) == self[i + 1]
      end
      true
    else
      (0..length-2).each do |i|
        return false unless self[i].next == self[i + 1]
      end
      true
    end
  end
  def seq3? # Original post without unnecessary code.
    if block_given?
      (0..length-2).each do |i|
        return false unless yield (self[i]) == self[i + 1]
      end
    else
      (0..length-2).each do |i|
        return false unless self[i].next == self[i + 1]
      end
    end
    true
  end
end

require "benchmark"
include Benchmark

a1 = (0..500000).to_a

bm(12) do |test|
  puts "seq1?:"
  test.report("block_given? inside  loop (without block):") do
    a1.seq1?
  end
  puts "seq1?:"
  test.report("block_given? inside  loop (with    block):") do
    a1.seq1? {|x| x + 1}
  end
  puts "seq2?:"
  test.report("block_given? outside loop (without block):") do
    a1.seq2?
  end
  puts "seq2?:"
  test.report("block_given? outside loop (with    block):") do
    a1.seq2? {|x| x + 1}
  end
  puts "seq3?:"
  test.report("block_given? outside loop (without block):") do
    a1.seq3?
  end
  puts "seq3?:"
  test.report("block_given? outside loop (with    block):") do
    a1.seq3? {|x| x + 1}
  end
end

---------------------Cut Here--------------------------------------

My system at work (ruby 1.6.3 (2001-03-19) [alphaev6-osf4.0f]) gives:

                                                user     system      total        real
seq1?:
block_given? inside  loop (without block):  3.600000   0.000000   3.600000 ( 14.125534)
seq1?:
block_given? inside  loop (with    block): 10.050000   0.033333  10.083333 ( 37.952742)
seq2?:
block_given? outside loop (without block):  3.166667   0.000000   3.166667 ( 11.513105)
seq2?:
block_given? outside loop (with    block):  8.950000   0.016667   8.966667 ( 33.622730)
seq3?:
block_given? outside loop (without block):  3.083333   0.000000   3.083333 ( 10.295878)
seq3?:
block_given? outside loop (with    block):  8.816667   0.016667   8.833333 ( 30.213270)