in reply to Re: About List::Util's pure Perl shuffle()
in thread About List::Util's pure Perl shuffle()
I suppose taking references might save memory, but it doesn't save any time over this (on small or large lists):
[snip]
I get about 16% better than the List::Util version (YMMV).
Indeed I was about to yell: "well, but then let's just adapt BrowserUk's version simply removing the referencing and dereferencing":
sub bzr (@) { my @a = @_; my $n; my $i = @_; map +($n=randi($i--), $a[$n], $a[$n]=$a[$i])[1], @_; }
But that won't work any more! (So kids don't copy the code above, it's crap! ;-) OTOH if I compare your code (as 'run') with BrowserUk's, I get:
Rate run buk run 7467/s -- -12% buk 8454/s 13% --
So that seems the best both speed and possibly memory wise.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^3: About List::Util's pure Perl shuffle()
by runrig (Abbot) on Jul 11, 2007 at 23:27 UTC | |
Re^3: About List::Util's pure Perl shuffle()
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jul 12, 2007 at 01:12 UTC | |
Re^3: About List::Util's pure Perl shuffle()
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jul 12, 2007 at 00:32 UTC |
In Section
Meditations