Fwd: Re: [Shootout-list] Ray tracer developments

[Isaac Gouy]

--- skaller <skaller@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
-snip- 
> > You don't have to be Jon Bently to recognize that
> > better compilers may give you multiples of
> > performance, but that better algorithms give you
> > orders of magnitude of improvement.
> >  
> > I kind of like this idea -- what do the rest of you
> > think?
> >  
> > I also think that I will get even more whiney
> > hate-mail than usual if we implement this change,
> > but I find the mail more amusing than hurtful, so
> > I'm game for it!  :-)
> 
> LOC is of course a poor measure of complexity.
> So a hard LOC limit is hard to justify.

LOC is a poor measure of how long the code is, let alone anything else.
Most folk notice that the original OCaml programs compress more onto
one line than they otherwise might.

I don't understand how LOC could be a surrogate for complexity.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com