[Shootout-list] A few unrelated points

[Isaac Gouy]

--- Stephen Weeks <sweeks@sweeks.com> wrote:
> I support the idea of changing the sumcol input to include negatives
> so that bignums are not required.  In the interim, while it is still
> being decided, I think the test should be disabled.

1) It's not clear to me why we would purposely delay making this
change.

There was no intention to test bignums, it was an unintended
consequence of trying to increase the runtime for the fastest
languages. Including negatives takes us to the status quo ante. 


2) We seem to be intent on removing the hash test because more time is
spent creating hash-keys than doing insert/lookup.

Does that mean much more than hash is a test of both number-to-string
conversion and hashtable insert/lookup - just as spell checker combines
 line-oriented I/O and hashtable insert/lookup?

I'm a little puzzled that no one has suggested that there should be a
"map" rather than "hash" test. 



		
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com