[Shootout-list] Ray tracer

[Isaac Gouy]

--- Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com> wrote:

> On Saturday 18 June 2005 16:45, Isaac Gouy wrote:
> > Seems like you just did enforce your own subjective belief!
> 
> How so?
> 
> > The ray-tracer programs started out with the same algorithm. Some
> of us
> >  wasted our time working on missing interpreted/bytecode languages
> to
> > get ray-tracer off The Sandbox and onto the main pages,
> 
> I can't see that anyone has wasted their time. Everyone else's
> submissions are 
> well over 100 LOC so there is no room for extra algorithms.
> 
> > and then others 
> > started contributing programs in the usual way - and now you've
> > pulled-the-rug from under them.
> 
> Not at all, if their submissions generate the correct result then
> they are 
> valid. You won't see me saying "oh but he cheated because he used a
> template, 
> referee Brent". ;-)

They would have contributed different programs.

You made a case for a particular ray-tracer algorithm, and provided
implementations of that same algorithm in several languages.

We worked to iron-out some initial problems and check a wider range of
languages - and ray-tracer was published on the main pages. So other
people started to contribute programs.

Now you've unilaterally decided ray-tracer should be different, and
seem deaf to Brent's objections.



> BTW, I think we should fix the "even N" thing before the ray tracer
> leaves the sandbox.

ray-tracer left The Sandbox - you just didn't notice.

Now we've thrown it back in The Sandbox.



> But yes, if people inherently believe that different programs doing 
> the same thing must be using the same algorithm then they'll 
> get it wrong on my ray tracer just as they'll get it wrong on most
> other programs (including those in the shootout).

More generalities. 


> I just grepped for OCaml's Hashtbl and I see 5 tests using it. Do you
> know how 
> it works, what hashing algorithm it uses, what its internal data
> structure 
> is? Do we care?
> 
> > > I appreciate the desire to compare seemingly equivalent programs
> but
> > > this is simply not possible in general and, consequently, must be
> > > dismissed.
> >
> > We do compare "seemingly" equivalent programs.
> 
> You try to and you get differing answers because of the fundamental
> flaw we're 
> pointing out.
> 
> > We deal with the particular, not the general.
> 
> I bet even you can't tell what these particular programs are actually
> doing, 
> Isaac. :-)
> 
> -- 
> Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
> Objective CAML for Scientists
> http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Shootout-list mailing list
> Shootout-list@lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/shootout-list
> 



		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com