|cino hilliard on Tue, 04 Apr 2006 02:50:35 +0200|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|Re: elapsed time and system command|
From: Joerg Arndt <email@example.com> To: cino hilliard <firstname.lastname@example.org> CC: email@example.com Subject: Re: elapsed time and system command Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 08:30:03 +0200 * cino hilliard <firstname.lastname@example.org> [Apr 02. 2006 16:44]: > Hi, > [...] >> The timing functions # and ## do not account for the time taken by calls to> external objects. > For example, > > (01:06) gp > # > timer = 1 (on) > (01:05) gp > t(n) = for(x=1,n,write("testtimer.txt","12345678901")) > (01:07) gp > t(100000) > time = 10,891 ms. > (01:08) gp > ## > *** last result computed in 10,891 ms. > > Actually took 50 sec. >> This has been the case for some time and applies to system commands also.> If timing would return wall clock time, it would be next to meaningless, i.e. depend on system load. Please keep it the way it is!
Write() is a Pari function. Why can't I use Pari to time the performance of this function? system() is a Pari function. Why can't I use Pari to time the performance of this function
call?In other words, why do I have to use something "meaningless" to measure the performance of
meaningful buit in Pari functions? Cheers and Roebuck, Cino