[Shootout-list] New matrix-norm not matrixy?

[Dave]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sebastien Loisel" <sloisel@gmail.com>
To: "Dave" <davejf@frontiernet.net>
Cc: <shootout-list@lists.alioth.debian.org>
Sent: Monday, March 28, 2005 3:35 AM
Subject: Re: [Shootout-list] New matrix-norm not matrixy?


>> > One of the advantages of the proposed matrix norm calculation is that
>> > it is resistant to LAPACK acceleration. So you'll have to get your
>> > hands dirty if you want to get some performance.
>>
>> given the recent discussion on testing compilers and runtimes, not 3rd 
>> party
>> libs.
>
> Well, can you tell there's a "third party lib" here?
>
> http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/sandbox/benchmark.php?test=matrix&lang=python&id=0&sort=fullcpu
>
> That's LAPACK.
>

No, with a casual glance and not knowing exactly what the base 
implementation of Python is, frankly I can't tell.

Maybe a better - if cumbersome - term for "3rd party libraries" would be 
"extraneous libraries not included in the base implementation" or some such.

However, if common base distributions of Python, or commonly used pre-built 
wrapper libraries make it that easy to use LAPACK then I'm Ok with that, 
because that represents a good "real-world/general-case" use of the 
language/implementation.

The challenge for at least some of the Shootout tests should be to minimize 
advantages like that - just like your matrix-norm test does.

My opinion boils down to: The better a test is at benchmarking base 
language/implementation facilities (and not "extraneous libraries" or 
hardware), the more suitable the test is for the Shootout, or maybe at the 
least those types of tests should have a higher default weight.

- Dave

>
> Sebastien Loisel
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.4 - Release Date: 3/27/2005
>
>