Timeline for Is TIO acceptable for fastest-code questions?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 6, 2017 at 9:24 | comment | added | user9206 | @Dennis I would be 100% happy with a TimeItOnline system that had a 60 seconds cap. That seems like a very reasonable solution. | |
| Jun 5, 2017 at 17:33 | comment | added | Pandacoder | @Dave Ok, that makes sense. And Dennis, that's why I included cycles in my wording, but Dave's response takes into account things that I wasn't even thinking of that would also nix my idea. | |
| Jun 5, 2017 at 17:31 | comment | added | Dennis Mod | @Pandacode Instruction count is a very unreliable way of approximating speed. On recent x86_64 CPUs, 64-bit divisonis hundreds of times slower than 64-bit addition. | |
| Jun 5, 2017 at 17:14 | comment | added | Dave | @Pandacoder execution cycles aren't everything; managing memory (caches) & concurrency better is often a much bigger win than reducing CPU cycles, once you're past the "big-O" optimisation. | |
| Jun 5, 2017 at 16:16 | comment | added | Pandacoder | I'm guessing that not every language can do this, but in an ideal world would counting instructions or execution cycles not be the most accurate way of timing? | |
| Jun 5, 2017 at 13:31 | comment | added | Dennis Mod | @PeterTaylor Yes, the time limit is 60 seconds, which is a further limitation. | |
| Jun 5, 2017 at 10:15 | comment | added | Peter Taylor | Even if TIO were reliable and consistent, doesn't it have a fairly low cap on the execution time? To properly judge fastest-code you need the option to time an execution which runs for between 1 and 10 minutes. | |
| Jun 5, 2017 at 1:05 | comment | added | Dennis Mod | @Challenger5 Then we have to time code and are back at square one. | |
| Jun 5, 2017 at 0:44 | comment | added | Esolanging Fruit | @Dennis How about fastest algorithm, with ties broken by speed? | |
| Jun 4, 2017 at 20:42 | comment | added | Dennis Mod | @EriktheOutgolfer That's hardly a fix. Asymptotic complexity can produce ties between a clearly superior and a clearly inferior algorithm. | |
| Jun 4, 2017 at 20:20 | comment | added | Erik the Outgolfer | @Dennis And the fix is... fastest-algorithm! | |
| Jun 3, 2017 at 15:28 | comment | added | Dennis Mod | Aside from running code on somebody else's computer if you cannot use your own, not really. I'd like to see more fastest-code challenges, but I suspect the problems that come with timing the submissions will put most people off. Maybe it's time for TimeItOnline... | |
| Jun 3, 2017 at 15:13 | comment | added | user9206 | Do you have any other suggestions for how we can run fastest-code challenges? We do have fastest-algorithm but that tends to get mathematical and hence less popular. | |
| Jun 3, 2017 at 15:13 | comment | added | Dennis Mod | Sorry, I meant having people time their code on their own machines. That's a fastest-computer challenge, not a fastest-code challenge. There's also no way of verifying the scores. | |
| Jun 3, 2017 at 15:12 | history | edited | DennisMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 6 characters in body |
| Jun 3, 2017 at 15:10 | history | answered | DennisMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |