Prime Numbers Discussion -[Results Included]-

Printable View

Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

Oct 3rd, 2004, 03:36 PM
RobDog888

Guess the Mods missed declaring that one. Oh well. Next time.
Still did better than I thought I would.

Later.
Oct 3rd, 2004, 07:00 PM
NotLKH

Understand all, I have a slow machine!!!
Anyways, so far...

My Results, with Q's:

NoteMe: initApp??? What da heck is THAT???:D

Anyways,:
Noteme: .0151 Seconds {compiled}

Bodwad:

Hmmm, Being "Visible=false" Is a form Prop.

Interesting...
Hmmm, I test with a hundred loops. Bodwads still going!!! {IDE MODE} {KILL IT!!!}
Ummmh, Form1.Caption slows thigs down enormously!!!

My Timed Bodwads is .4221 seconds, average. {compiled!!!}

Ok. Now EX_FB...

1 moment please. I'm going to double check, once I do FB's, but I need a smoke.
Hey, Mendhak!!! Bring the Fire!!!

:D
Oct 3rd, 2004, 07:17 PM
NotLKH

EX_FB:
.1128 Secoinds, compiled.

Alrighty then.

Hey, Ex, Note, Bodwad,

Whats My Time???

http://www.vbforums.com/attachment.p...postid=1797398

Hey, Jala,

Just making sure, JIC Ex_VB is correct.
This IS my code you tested, isn't it???

[Highlight=VB]
'on your "start"
call BUILD_THEM

'and then, on a bas:

VB Code:

Option Explicit
 
Dim MyI As Integer
Dim MyJ As Integer
Dim MyK As Integer
 
Dim MyUL As Integer
Dim MyTopmost As Integer
Dim MyRoot As Integer
 
Dim MyNumbers(999) As Integer
Public Sub BUILD_THEM()
'Assumptions: since 1 is not a prime, and since the only whole positive Integer below 2 is 1, then
'2 is the first prime
'also, I will assume, since this is going to be timed,
'that I must handle clearing the output listbox within the sub
'that also outputs to the listbox.
 
Form1.Enabled = False
Form1.lstMyPrimes.Visible = False
Form1.lstMyPrimes.Clear
 
                            'to be fair, if this is going to be timed, in a loop,
                            'I should make sure that MyNumbers are all initialized to 0
 
For MyI = 0 To 999
    MyNumbers(MyI) = 0
Next MyI
MyNumbers(0) = 2
 
MyI = 0
MyJ = MyNumbers(MyI) + 1
MyTopmost = 0
MyUL = (MyNumbers(MyTopmost) * MyNumbers(MyTopmost)) - 1
MyRoot = 1
Do While MyI < UBound(MyNumbers)
    MyK = 0
    If MyJ > MyUL Then      'seems to be faster than calculating sqr(myj) over and over
        MyRoot = MyNumbers(MyTopmost)
        MyTopmost = MyTopmost + 1
        MyUL = (MyNumbers(MyTopmost) * MyNumbers(MyTopmost)) - 1
    End If
    MyI = MyI + 1
    MyNumbers(MyI) = MyJ
    Do While MyNumbers(MyK) <= MyRoot
        If MyJ Mod MyNumbers(MyK) = 0 Then
            MyI = MyI - 1
            Exit Do
        End If
        MyK = MyK + 1
    Loop
    MyJ = MyJ + 2           'only test the odd, since all even are divisible by 2, and 2 is prime
Loop
                            'well, can't do this anymore!
                            'For MyK = 0 To 990 Step 10
                            '    For MyJ = 0 To 9
                            '        MyParts(MyJ) = CStr(MyNumbers(MyK + MyJ))
                            '    Next MyJ
                            '    Form1.lstMyPrimes.AddItem Join(MyParts, " ")
                            'Next MyK
For MyK = 0 To 999
    Form1.lstMyPrimes.AddItem CStr(MyNumbers(MyK))
Next MyK
 
 
Form1.lstMyPrimes.Visible = True
Form1.Enabled = True
 
End Sub

Oct 4th, 2004, 02:12 AM
BodwadUK

Wohoo thats a shock.

I did resubmit the code with alot of changes BTW :D

Your all sore losers, You also forget I am king and therefore must win or the winner would have to be executed for treason :afrog:
Oct 4th, 2004, 04:05 AM
NoteMe

Quote:

Originally posted by NoteMe

IDE:

Code:

Bodwad: 0.21177 sec NotLKH: 0.01567 sec Ex-FB: 0.00580 sec NoteMe: 0.00567 sec

Compiled:

Code:

Bodwad: 0.0530 sec NotLKH: 0.00571 sec Ex-FB: 0.00485 sec NoteMe: 0.00417 sec

ADded you NotLKH to my times...
Oct 4th, 2004, 04:14 AM
NoteMe

Can't understand how that dog won with 10-40 times slower code then us...:D....where are your resubmitted code....
Oct 4th, 2004, 05:10 AM
BodwadUK

1 Attachment(s)

:rolleyes:

Think this is it. its the one on my desktop :afrog:
Oct 4th, 2004, 05:31 AM
cyborg

Hey! Could you compare my code too? I think it was pretty fast! Somewhere under 10 ms at least. I don't understand how my code could get that low points. It was a clean, smart and fast code, and pretty well commented.
Oct 4th, 2004, 05:41 AM
NoteMe

I will test both your codes when I get home. I am atschool now...
Oct 4th, 2004, 05:41 AM
BodwadUK

The judges decision is final and cannot be changed. (I Hope :afrog: )
Oct 4th, 2004, 05:50 AM
NoteMe

Well lets wait and see....looks like Pino is in exile....;)
Oct 4th, 2004, 06:54 AM
Merri

I wonder what really counted in the contest results, after seeing the top three. Atleast speed didn't matter much. Design didn't matter much (all three had only a button and a listbox - very original). Maybe I should have spent only two hours on it and keep it simplistic, since that's what seemed to count.

Tired from a several days long trip. But would be nice to know how the points were actually given.
Oct 4th, 2004, 07:42 AM
BodwadUK

It might have been code layout and complexity. Use of prefab functions might reduce score etc. Dont know really. :)
Oct 4th, 2004, 07:47 AM
NotLKH

Hey, Noteme,
Think you could also do an average time on 100 iterations of the codes? I've noticed on some of the codes that times increase during multiple calls, perhaps due to inefficiencies in reinitializing the setup, while others decrease.

And throw merris into the mix, if you have a chance.
:wave:

BTW, Merri, Nice code!
I thought multiple columns weren't allowed, but still it looks nice!
:)
Oct 4th, 2004, 07:49 AM
NotLKH

Quote:

Originally posted by BodwadUK
...Use of prefab functions...

http://www.vbforums.com/attachment.p...postid=1797398

Such As, IYHO?

:)
Oct 4th, 2004, 07:55 AM
BodwadUK

Such as format, Sin, Cos, replace, split

etc etc

I dont know if anyone used them I am just saying its possible :)

Is this an accurate assesment of the assumptions made in our codes:

VB Code:

Bodwad: "Assumes" 2 is prime so tests only odd, does not assume end boundary.   +1
Ex_FB:  "Assumes" 2 is prime so Tests only odd, Assumes 1000 primes by 7919.    +2
NoteMe: "Assumes" 2 is prime so Tests only odd, assumes 1000 Primes by 7919.    +2
Merri:  "Assumes" 2 is prime so Tests only odd, assumes 1000 Primes by 7919.    +2
NotLKH: "Assumes" 2 is prime so tests only odd, does not assume end boundary.   +1
David:  "Assumes" 2,3,5 are prime, does not assume end boundary.        +3
Badger: Tests 2, but does test assume 2 is prime?[sup]*[/sup], does not assume end boundary.        +0

:wave:

^* You decide: Call is made to test 2 thru the following:

VB Code:

Function isprime(mynum As Long) As Boolean
Dim a As Long
For a = 2 To (mynum - 1)
    If mynum Mod a = 0 Then
        isprime = False
        Exit Function
    End If
Next a
isprime = True
End Function

Oct 4th, 2004, 09:10 AM
NoteMe

Quote:

Originally posted by NotLKH
Hey, Noteme,
Think you could also do an average time on 100 iterations of the codes? I've noticed on some of the codes that times increase during multiple calls, perhaps due to inefficiencies in reinitializing the setup, while others decrease.

And throw merris into the mix, if you have a chance.
:wave:

BTW, Merri, Nice code!
I thought multiple columns weren't allowed, but still it looks nice!
:)

WEll would love to do that too...but not sure if I have the time...at least not now....and BTW the way you are getting faster results that way on some apps and slower on others is the cache layout. Depends on how much cache you have, what kind of level they are and how they are sorted, and of course the most obvious of them, cache misses, and trashing...;)
Oct 4th, 2004, 09:22 AM
NoteMe

Update:

Quote:

Originally posted by NoteMe

The way it is tested. It is tested on a 1900+ machine both compiled and in the IDE. I am running the test 5 times, and the time under here, is the average og test 2-5.

IDE:

Code:

Bodwad2: 0.21540 sec Bodwad: 0.21177 sec Cyborg: 0.02351 sec NotLKH: 0.01567 sec Merri: 0.00629 sec Ex-FB: 0.00580 sec NoteMe: 0.00567 sec

Compiled:

Code:

Bodwad2: 0.05478 sec Bodwad: 0.0530 sec Cyborg: 0.00959 sec NotLKH: 0.00571 sec Ex-FB: 0.00485 sec Merri: 0.00467 sec NoteMe: 0.00417 sec
Oct 4th, 2004, 09:30 AM
NoteMe

Well congratulation to Merri...his code was realy fast. And Bodwads code is still slow as hell...:D....his code is not even in a module....shot him...:D
Oct 4th, 2004, 09:59 AM
ntg

Hi,

Gongrats to the winners :thumb: and thanks everyone for an enjoyable contest.

BTW, I think it's completely lame to just post overall marks without a basic breakdown (speed of algo, overall speed, code readability, negative points for assumptions, error handling or whatever).

Cheers,
NTG
Oct 4th, 2004, 10:13 AM
BodwadUK

Hey stop complaining I won :afrog:
Oct 4th, 2004, 10:13 AM
BodwadUK

Did you use the same timing module noteme? :afrog:
Oct 4th, 2004, 10:46 AM
wossname

99/100 read it and weep.
Oct 4th, 2004, 11:56 AM
NoteMe

Quote:

Originally posted by BodwadUK
Did you use the same timing module noteme? :afrog:

Off course I did.....look who posted it.....;)
Oct 4th, 2004, 03:46 PM
Electroman

NoteMe I told you yestaday that there was a mistake when Bodwad's code was tested. I thought Pino would have annouced it offically by now though :confused:.
Oct 4th, 2004, 03:55 PM
NotLKH

Then do the times of those that Noteme list seem to accurately correspond with the actual testing results?
Oct 4th, 2004, 03:58 PM
Electroman

Quote:

Posted by NotLKH
Then do the times of those that Noteme list seem to accurately correspond with the actual testing results?

I couldn't say but I know that the timing problem only effects bodwad, so the other rankings will keep its order just Bodwad will move down the list :).
Oct 4th, 2004, 04:07 PM
Pino

sorry for delay i had to re-test everyones code again,

firstly let me appoligise for this!

the results have changed slightly because of a mix up with the timing n Bodwads entry! the Vb.net entries are fine, but the VB6 ones have changed ever so slightly!

Code:

VbasicGirl 33 Acidic 37 BPD 38 NotLKH 39 Cyborg 39 Riis 46 RobDog 55 BodwardUK 59 StephenHickerson 63 Ex-FB 65 Dsheller 68 Merri 74 NoteMe 78 SeniorBadger 85 Dave Sell 92

again i am sorry for the mix up
Oct 4th, 2004, 04:15 PM
NotLKH

Hmmm.
As has been mentioned, how do those scores breakdown, since it was, although primarily going to be based on speed, other factors were going to be considered.

And, we ALL are dying to know the actual timings.

Is Bodwads actually that much faster than mine?

:)
-Just wondering
-Lou

PS:

Seems its an Olympic Moment.
Couldn't you let Bodwad keep his gold?
Be an Honorary CoWinner?
Oct 4th, 2004, 04:17 PM
dogfish227

1 Attachment(s)

they corrispond via the following equation:

y=1.45x^5 - 23.583x^4 + 137.42x^3 - 337.92x^2 + 305.63x + 11

where X is the speed and y is the score

view attachment for graph
Oct 4th, 2004, 04:24 PM
NoteMe

Bhahhhaa...I am number 3 now..::D
Oct 4th, 2004, 05:40 PM
NoteMe

Intresting update....thanks to NotLKH for noticing...;)

Now Dave Sell is on the test bench...;)

Quote:

Originally posted by NoteMe

The way it is tested. It is tested on a 1900+ machine both compiled and in the IDE. I am running the test 5 times, and the time under here, is the average og test 2-5.

IDE:

Code:

Bodwad2: 0.21540 sec Bodwad: 0.21177 sec Cyborg: 0.02351 sec Dave Sell: 0.20854 sec NotLKH: 0.01567 sec Merri: 0.00629 sec Ex-FB: 0.00580 sec NoteMe: 0.00567 sec

Compiled:

Code:

Dave Sell: 0.12635 sec Bodwad2: 0.05478 sec Bodwad: 0.0530 sec Cyborg: 0.00959 sec NotLKH: 0.00571 sec Ex-FB: 0.00485 sec Merri: 0.00467 sec NoteMe: 0.00417 sec

'

How the hell did the slowest code on earth win....:D
Oct 4th, 2004, 05:49 PM
NoteMe

And with even more help from NotLKH.....We tested SeiorBadgers code, and we even optimised the command click event a bit....and it is still slower then my grandmother.....Pino...I refuse to belive that you tested all of the apps again after we pointed out that you did something wrong...:D

Intresting update....thanks to NotLKH for noticing...;)

Now Dave Sell is on the test bench...;)

Quote:

Originally posted by NoteMe

The way it is tested. It is tested on a 1900+ machine both compiled and in the IDE. I am running the test 5 times, and the time under here, is the average og test 2-5.

IDE:

Code:

SeniorB: 0.41167 sec Bodwad2: 0.21540 sec Bodwad: 0.21177 sec Cyborg: 0.02351 sec Dave Sell: 0.20854 sec NotLKH: 0.01567 sec Merri: 0.00629 sec Ex-FB: 0.00580 sec NoteMe: 0.00567 sec

Compiled:

Code:

Dave Sell: 0.12635 sec SeniorB: 0.11036 sec Bodwad2: 0.05478 sec Bodwad: 0.0530 sec Cyborg: 0.00959 sec NotLKH: 0.00571 sec Ex-FB: 0.00485 sec Merri: 0.00467 sec NoteMe: 0.00417 sec
Oct 4th, 2004, 05:51 PM
NoteMe

If it was me who did this contest, I would have said it was more or less draw on the speed between Merri, Ex-FB and NoteMe. And voted the prettiest of those 3 codes as the winner, and added NotLKH as a goooood 4th.....well thats at least my 2 cent...
Oct 4th, 2004, 07:04 PM
NotLKH

Still Bodward?
Oct 4th, 2004, 09:39 PM
Ex-FB

In fairness, this was just a test competition. So how about we leave it and go on to the next one. One thing though I think we've learned is that if we're going to time a competition in future, then maybe the judges should provide the code for the timing module and make us put it in first. And all code has to go between the timer start and the timer stop (so no showing forms after the timer has stopped etc.)

I think as a test it has worked well and done it's job in ironing out the bugs in the system. I'm sure there will be more problems in future contests, but none of us should take this too seriously, it's a bit of fun, and it'll just keep getting better and better I'm sure, and eventually it'll run as smooth as clockwork.

Btw, NoteMe, could you time so that you update my small mistake on my submitted code (really stupid, just didn't bother to submit updated code) and test the algo again?

Comment out D = A \ 2 lines, then set A \ 2 instead of D to the inner loop line between the out commented lines. This should speed up the algorithm code nicely. Silly mistake, but... :D

Hmm... looks like I'm the only one who made a flexible code. Nobody else seemed to allow to give almost any number to test to. And I got no bonus for doing so either.

Anyways, here is my test for the fastest algorithm (atm only me vs. NoteMe, for being fastest with the compiled code):

Code:

Merri: 0.020394 ms NoteMe: 0.071517 ms

With this I mean the speed of the actual algorithm. No output to listbox and no initialization of the arrays or other variables included. Only the algorithm itself.

Tested/testing code for Merri (this is the slightly fixed version):
VB Code:
Set Q = New sTime
    Q.Init
    Q.StartTime
    
    A = 3
    B = 9
    Do While B < Total
        C = A + A
        Do While B < Total
            NumberTable(B \ 2) = True
            B = B + C
        Loop
        A = A + 2
        Do While NumberTable(A \ 2)
            A = A + 2
        Loop
        B = A * A
    Loop
 
    Q.StopTime
    MsgBox Format$(Q.RetTime * 1000, "0.000000") & " ms"
Tested/testing code for NoteMe:
VB Code:
Set Q = New sTime
    Q.Init
    Q.StartTime
    
        For i = 3 To 7919 Step 2
            If Not (IsComposite(i)) Then
                For j = i To 7917 \ i Step 2
                    IsComposite(j * i) = True
                Next j
            End If
        Next i
    
    Q.StopTime
    MsgBox Format$(Q.RetTime * 1000, "0.000000") & " ms"
I removed comments from the code to reduce length of the message. Tested machine details:

AMD Athlon XP 2200+ @ 1800 MHz
1024 MB DDR @ 333 MHz
ASUS A7N8X-VM/400 mini-ATX motherboard

Ex-FB: if you didn't notice, we're doing all this stuff at the moment for fun :D

Oct 4th, 2004, 10:36 PM
Ex-FB

Quote:

Originally posted by Merri

Ex-FB: if you didn't notice, we're doing all this stuff at the moment for fun :D

:p Yeah, sorry I didn't mean to sound serious, just didn't want the competitions to stop becuase of all the complications.

And, if your really trying to compare speed of code, you should really both set your columns to zero as per the rules, seems I'm the only one who obeyed that ruling :p, or alternativly put my multi-column code back in... it knocks quite a chunk off on my machine...:thumb:

Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page