[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PCL 70 times slower than Ernie with 1000 cars.
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: PCL 70 times slower than Ernie with 1000 cars.
- From: Gregor.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 88 11:04 PST
- Cc: CommonLoops.pa@Xerox.COM
- Fcc: BD:>Gregor>mail>outgoing-mail-4.text.newest
- In-reply-to: <8811152147.AA11437@taos.arpa>
- Line-fold: no
Please don't send anymore of these message until you are ready to show
us the source code in ERNIE.
There is no basis in fact to believe that you are comparing apples to
apples. Other people on the list have pointed to irregularities in your
measurements, but none of us can conclude anything without knowing
exactly what the comparison is. Statements like "my friend Bill
compared the two programs and said they were the same" just don't cut
This is a (basically) scientific community. If you are going to make
performance claims or discuss measurements you have to show exactly what
you measured and how you measured it. That is what makes it possible
for others to respond to your claims directly. It is also what makes it
possible for us as implementors to know how to improve the performance
of our systems.
If it becomes possible for you to make the code available, and you
decide to present your performance numbers again, you might consider
checking your results with other individuals before sending them to such
a large list. It is often a good idea to subject provacative claims to
some sort of external peer review before presenting them to a large