The Trunk: Tests-ul.200.mcz
Locked
 
|
Levente Uzonyi uploaded a new version of Tests to project The Trunk:
http://source.squeak.org/trunk/Tests-ul.200.mcz ==================== Summary ==================== Name: Tests-ul.200 Author: ul Time: 27 April 2013, 10:08:43.206 pm UUID: dfe70287-0768-42f9-97b7-d7ba6fbd6bb6 Ancestors: Tests-fbs.199 - avoid suboptimal string concatentation in ReleaseTest >> #testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals =============== Diff against Tests-fbs.199 =============== Item was changed: ----- Method: ReleaseTest>>testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals (in category 'testing') ----- testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals | unbound | unbound := SystemNavigation default methodsWithUnboundGlobals. Smalltalk cleanOutUndeclared. + self assert: unbound isEmpty description: 'Unbound: ', unbound asCommaString! - self assert: unbound isEmpty description: ('Unbound: ', (unbound reduce: [:acc :each | acc, ', ', each]))! |
Re: The Trunk: Tests-ul.200.mcz
|
|
2013/4/27 <[hidden email]> Levente Uzonyi uploaded a new version of Tests to project The Trunk: |
Re: The Trunk: Tests-ul.200.mcz
|
|
In Schlemiel's algorithm you have to traverse your string from the
beginning. Here, the problem is that at every step you're making String after String after String that you just throw away. Unless perhaps you're suggesting that the Schlemielness comes from not doing things the way our particular garbage collector like to do things? frank On 27 April 2013 22:08, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schlemiel_the_Painter%27s_algorithm > > > 2013/4/27 <[hidden email]> > >> Levente Uzonyi uploaded a new version of Tests to project The Trunk: >> http://source.squeak.org/trunk/Tests-ul.200.mcz >> >> ==================== Summary ==================== >> >> Name: Tests-ul.200 >> Author: ul >> Time: 27 April 2013, 10:08:43.206 pm >> UUID: dfe70287-0768-42f9-97b7-d7ba6fbd6bb6 >> Ancestors: Tests-fbs.199 >> >> - avoid suboptimal string concatentation in ReleaseTest >> >> #testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals >> >> =============== Diff against Tests-fbs.199 =============== >> >> Item was changed: >> ----- Method: ReleaseTest>>testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals (in category >> 'testing') ----- >> testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals >> | unbound | >> unbound := SystemNavigation default methodsWithUnboundGlobals. >> Smalltalk cleanOutUndeclared. >> + self assert: unbound isEmpty description: 'Unbound: ', unbound >> asCommaString! >> - self assert: unbound isEmpty description: ('Unbound: ', (unbound >> reduce: [:acc :each | acc, ', ', each]))! >> >> > > > > |
Re: The Trunk: Tests-ul.200.mcz
|
|
In reply to this post by commits-2
On 27 April 2013 21:24, <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Levente Uzonyi uploaded a new version of Tests to project The Trunk: > http://source.squeak.org/trunk/Tests-ul.200.mcz > > ==================== Summary ==================== > > Name: Tests-ul.200 > Author: ul > Time: 27 April 2013, 10:08:43.206 pm > UUID: dfe70287-0768-42f9-97b7-d7ba6fbd6bb6 > Ancestors: Tests-fbs.199 > > - avoid suboptimal string concatentation in ReleaseTest >> #testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals And "asCommaString" is more intention revealing. More insight into the failing test at http://build.squeak.org/job/SqueakTrunk/281/testReport/junit/Tests.Release/ReleaseTest/testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals/ (Warning: it's pretty big.) It's possible that this test is showing that every single method in every single class has unbound globals. That's highly indicative of a bug in the SystemNavigation >> #methodsWithUnboundGlobals. Well, not _there_. Perhaps the bug starts from "m methodClass bindingOf: l key"? frank |
Re: The Trunk: Tests-ul.200.mcz
|
|
In reply to this post by Frank Shearar-3
Then what does #, exactly if not traversing the String from the beginning when making a concatenated copy? 2013/4/27 Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> In Schlemiel's algorithm you have to traverse your string from the |
Re: The Trunk: Tests-ul.200.mcz
|
|
In reply to this post by Frank Shearar-3
On Sat, 27 Apr 2013, Frank Shearar wrote:
> In Schlemiel's algorithm you have to traverse your string from the > beginning. Here, the problem is that at every step you're making > String after String after String that you just throw away. > > Unless perhaps you're suggesting that the Schlemielness comes from not > doing things the way our particular garbage collector like to do > things? Your code looks right, and works well in a functional programming language which has the required optimizations to run such code efficiently. But in Smalltalk it creates 2n-1 intermediate strings, where the previous is the prefix of the current one, so each one is longer than the previous, which means that O(n^2) bytes are allocated, filled, read once, and then garbage collected. This means that the runtime cost is also O(n^2). Levente > > frank > > On 27 April 2013 22:08, Nicolas Cellier > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schlemiel_the_Painter%27s_algorithm >> >> >> 2013/4/27 <[hidden email]> >> >>> Levente Uzonyi uploaded a new version of Tests to project The Trunk: >>> http://source.squeak.org/trunk/Tests-ul.200.mcz >>> >>> ==================== Summary ==================== >>> >>> Name: Tests-ul.200 >>> Author: ul >>> Time: 27 April 2013, 10:08:43.206 pm >>> UUID: dfe70287-0768-42f9-97b7-d7ba6fbd6bb6 >>> Ancestors: Tests-fbs.199 >>> >>> - avoid suboptimal string concatentation in ReleaseTest >> >>> #testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals >>> >>> =============== Diff against Tests-fbs.199 =============== >>> >>> Item was changed: >>> ----- Method: ReleaseTest>>testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals (in category >>> 'testing') ----- >>> testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals >>> | unbound | >>> unbound := SystemNavigation default methodsWithUnboundGlobals. >>> Smalltalk cleanOutUndeclared. >>> + self assert: unbound isEmpty description: 'Unbound: ', unbound >>> asCommaString! >>> - self assert: unbound isEmpty description: ('Unbound: ', (unbound >>> reduce: [:acc :each | acc, ', ', each]))! >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > |
Re: The Trunk: Tests-ul.200.mcz
|
|
Ah, yes, in a FPL it's another story... By the way Frank, sorry for http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3527753/why-is-smalltalk-not-a-functional-programming-language, Smalltalk if ever considered as a FPL, would not only be an impure FPL but also an inefficient one :(2013/4/27 Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>
|
Re: The Trunk: Tests-ul.200.mcz
|
|
I don't really have the energy for re-arguing that point. In summary,
the primary argument against Smalltalk being an FPL is that the community doesn't write functional code. Inefficient? Only because noone's bothered making it efficient. So I'm not going to argue any further, and instead continue pushing Squeak in the direction of writing code functionally. (Note that nothing in that SO argument even vaguely touches the actual serious stuff, like "classes confound several issues that should be orthogonal".) frank On 28 April 2013 01:13, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote: > Ah, yes, in a FPL it's another story... > By the way Frank, sorry for > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3527753/why-is-smalltalk-not-a-functional-programming-language, > Smalltalk if ever considered as a FPL, would not only be an impure FPL but > also an inefficient one :( > > > 2013/4/27 Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]> >> >> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013, Frank Shearar wrote: >> >>> In Schlemiel's algorithm you have to traverse your string from the >>> beginning. Here, the problem is that at every step you're making >>> String after String after String that you just throw away. >>> >>> Unless perhaps you're suggesting that the Schlemielness comes from not >>> doing things the way our particular garbage collector like to do >>> things? >> >> >> Your code looks right, and works well in a functional programming language >> which has the required optimizations to run such code efficiently. But in >> Smalltalk it creates 2n-1 intermediate strings, where the previous is the >> prefix of the current one, so each one is longer than the previous, which >> means that O(n^2) bytes are allocated, filled, read once, and then garbage >> collected. This means that the runtime cost is also O(n^2). >> >> >> Levente >> >> >>> >>> frank >>> >>> On 27 April 2013 22:08, Nicolas Cellier >>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schlemiel_the_Painter%27s_algorithm >>>> >>>> >>>> 2013/4/27 <[hidden email]> >>>> >>>>> Levente Uzonyi uploaded a new version of Tests to project The Trunk: >>>>> http://source.squeak.org/trunk/Tests-ul.200.mcz >>>>> >>>>> ==================== Summary ==================== >>>>> >>>>> Name: Tests-ul.200 >>>>> Author: ul >>>>> Time: 27 April 2013, 10:08:43.206 pm >>>>> UUID: dfe70287-0768-42f9-97b7-d7ba6fbd6bb6 >>>>> Ancestors: Tests-fbs.199 >>>>> >>>>> - avoid suboptimal string concatentation in ReleaseTest >> >>>>> #testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals >>>>> >>>>> =============== Diff against Tests-fbs.199 =============== >>>>> >>>>> Item was changed: >>>>> ----- Method: ReleaseTest>>testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals (in category >>>>> 'testing') ----- >>>>> testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals >>>>> | unbound | >>>>> unbound := SystemNavigation default methodsWithUnboundGlobals. >>>>> Smalltalk cleanOutUndeclared. >>>>> + self assert: unbound isEmpty description: 'Unbound: ', unbound >>>>> asCommaString! >>>>> - self assert: unbound isEmpty description: ('Unbound: ', >>>>> (unbound >>>>> reduce: [:acc :each | acc, ', ', each]))! >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > > > > |
Re: The Trunk: Tests-ul.200.mcz
|
|
Is there any practical difference between #reduce: and #inject:into:?
On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 4:35 AM, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote: > I don't really have the energy for re-arguing that point. In summary, > the primary argument against Smalltalk being an FPL is that the > community doesn't write functional code. Inefficient? Only because > noone's bothered making it efficient. > > So I'm not going to argue any further, and instead continue pushing > Squeak in the direction of writing code functionally. > > (Note that nothing in that SO argument even vaguely touches the actual > serious stuff, like "classes confound several issues that should be > orthogonal".) > > frank > > On 28 April 2013 01:13, Nicolas Cellier > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Ah, yes, in a FPL it's another story... >> By the way Frank, sorry for >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3527753/why-is-smalltalk-not-a-functional-programming-language, >> Smalltalk if ever considered as a FPL, would not only be an impure FPL but >> also an inefficient one :( >> >> >> 2013/4/27 Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]> >>> >>> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013, Frank Shearar wrote: >>> >>>> In Schlemiel's algorithm you have to traverse your string from the >>>> beginning. Here, the problem is that at every step you're making >>>> String after String after String that you just throw away. >>>> >>>> Unless perhaps you're suggesting that the Schlemielness comes from not >>>> doing things the way our particular garbage collector like to do >>>> things? >>> >>> >>> Your code looks right, and works well in a functional programming language >>> which has the required optimizations to run such code efficiently. But in >>> Smalltalk it creates 2n-1 intermediate strings, where the previous is the >>> prefix of the current one, so each one is longer than the previous, which >>> means that O(n^2) bytes are allocated, filled, read once, and then garbage >>> collected. This means that the runtime cost is also O(n^2). >>> >>> >>> Levente >>> >>> >>>> >>>> frank >>>> >>>> On 27 April 2013 22:08, Nicolas Cellier >>>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schlemiel_the_Painter%27s_algorithm >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2013/4/27 <[hidden email]> >>>>> >>>>>> Levente Uzonyi uploaded a new version of Tests to project The Trunk: >>>>>> http://source.squeak.org/trunk/Tests-ul.200.mcz >>>>>> >>>>>> ==================== Summary ==================== >>>>>> >>>>>> Name: Tests-ul.200 >>>>>> Author: ul >>>>>> Time: 27 April 2013, 10:08:43.206 pm >>>>>> UUID: dfe70287-0768-42f9-97b7-d7ba6fbd6bb6 >>>>>> Ancestors: Tests-fbs.199 >>>>>> >>>>>> - avoid suboptimal string concatentation in ReleaseTest >> >>>>>> #testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals >>>>>> >>>>>> =============== Diff against Tests-fbs.199 =============== >>>>>> >>>>>> Item was changed: >>>>>> ----- Method: ReleaseTest>>testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals (in category >>>>>> 'testing') ----- >>>>>> testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals >>>>>> | unbound | >>>>>> unbound := SystemNavigation default methodsWithUnboundGlobals. >>>>>> Smalltalk cleanOutUndeclared. >>>>>> + self assert: unbound isEmpty description: 'Unbound: ', unbound >>>>>> asCommaString! >>>>>> - self assert: unbound isEmpty description: ('Unbound: ', >>>>>> (unbound >>>>>> reduce: [:acc :each | acc, ', ', each]))! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> > |
Re: The Trunk: Tests-ul.200.mcz
|
|
In reply to this post by Frank Shearar-3
Yes, please, don't argue, I was pulling your leg ;) What I generally say is that Smalltalk is the most functional object oriented language (intentionally ignoring Scala)2013/4/28 Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> I don't really have the energy for re-arguing that point. In summary, |
Re: The Trunk: Tests-ul.200.mcz
|
|
In reply to this post by Chris Muller-3
Yes, although it may sound like splitting hairs. You could say that
myCollection reduce: aBlock == myCollection allButFirst inject: myCollection first into: aBlock. So if you don't know whether your collection's empty, use #inject:into:. But if you know for certain it's not empty, #reduce: spares you a few key presses. (Haskellers would call #reduce: foldl1, and they'd call #inject:into: foldl.) frank On 28 April 2013 18:20, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote: > Is there any practical difference between #reduce: and #inject:into:? > > On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 4:35 AM, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote: >> I don't really have the energy for re-arguing that point. In summary, >> the primary argument against Smalltalk being an FPL is that the >> community doesn't write functional code. Inefficient? Only because >> noone's bothered making it efficient. >> >> So I'm not going to argue any further, and instead continue pushing >> Squeak in the direction of writing code functionally. >> >> (Note that nothing in that SO argument even vaguely touches the actual >> serious stuff, like "classes confound several issues that should be >> orthogonal".) >> >> frank >> >> On 28 April 2013 01:13, Nicolas Cellier >> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> Ah, yes, in a FPL it's another story... >>> By the way Frank, sorry for >>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3527753/why-is-smalltalk-not-a-functional-programming-language, >>> Smalltalk if ever considered as a FPL, would not only be an impure FPL but >>> also an inefficient one :( >>> >>> >>> 2013/4/27 Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]> >>>> >>>> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013, Frank Shearar wrote: >>>> >>>>> In Schlemiel's algorithm you have to traverse your string from the >>>>> beginning. Here, the problem is that at every step you're making >>>>> String after String after String that you just throw away. >>>>> >>>>> Unless perhaps you're suggesting that the Schlemielness comes from not >>>>> doing things the way our particular garbage collector like to do >>>>> things? >>>> >>>> >>>> Your code looks right, and works well in a functional programming language >>>> which has the required optimizations to run such code efficiently. But in >>>> Smalltalk it creates 2n-1 intermediate strings, where the previous is the >>>> prefix of the current one, so each one is longer than the previous, which >>>> means that O(n^2) bytes are allocated, filled, read once, and then garbage >>>> collected. This means that the runtime cost is also O(n^2). >>>> >>>> >>>> Levente >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> frank >>>>> >>>>> On 27 April 2013 22:08, Nicolas Cellier >>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schlemiel_the_Painter%27s_algorithm >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2013/4/27 <[hidden email]> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Levente Uzonyi uploaded a new version of Tests to project The Trunk: >>>>>>> http://source.squeak.org/trunk/Tests-ul.200.mcz >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ==================== Summary ==================== >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Name: Tests-ul.200 >>>>>>> Author: ul >>>>>>> Time: 27 April 2013, 10:08:43.206 pm >>>>>>> UUID: dfe70287-0768-42f9-97b7-d7ba6fbd6bb6 >>>>>>> Ancestors: Tests-fbs.199 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - avoid suboptimal string concatentation in ReleaseTest >> >>>>>>> #testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals >>>>>>> >>>>>>> =============== Diff against Tests-fbs.199 =============== >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Item was changed: >>>>>>> ----- Method: ReleaseTest>>testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals (in category >>>>>>> 'testing') ----- >>>>>>> testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals >>>>>>> | unbound | >>>>>>> unbound := SystemNavigation default methodsWithUnboundGlobals. >>>>>>> Smalltalk cleanOutUndeclared. >>>>>>> + self assert: unbound isEmpty description: 'Unbound: ', unbound >>>>>>> asCommaString! >>>>>>> - self assert: unbound isEmpty description: ('Unbound: ', >>>>>>> (unbound >>>>>>> reduce: [:acc :each | acc, ', ', each]))! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |