From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6F75BC69 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 11:26:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from server2.thinkcrime.de (server2.thinkcrime.de [213.133.110.149]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l19AQqRQ009485 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 11:26:52 +0100 Received: from hod-sarge-2005-10.lan.m-e-leypold.de (dslb-088-072-219-206.pools.arcor-ip.net [88.72.219.206]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by server2.thinkcrime.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40DFB488032 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 11:26:53 +0100 (CET) Received: by hod-sarge-2005-10.lan.m-e-leypold.de (Postfix, from userid 1003) id 75132376C1; Fri, 9 Feb 2007 11:32:02 +0100 (CET) To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Multiplication of matrix in C and OCaml References: <45CAF3E2.7020807@univ-paris12.fr> <45CAFF5A.2020607@inria.fr> <45CB3ED0.9040200@univ-paris12.fr> <20070209.115842.106265091.garrigue@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp> From: ls-ocaml-developer-2006@m-e-leypold.de Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 11:32:02 +0100 In-Reply-To: (ls-ocaml-developer's message of "Fri, 09 Feb 2007 10:06:18 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Some cool user agent (SCUG) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 45CC4C6C.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 matrices:01 caml-list:01 writes:01 output:02 correction:04 problem:05 problem:05 i'd:05 subtract:07 file:08 file:08 constant:10 constant:10 contribution:11 ls-ocaml-developer-2006@m-e-leypold.de writes: > optimizations. I'd feel better if the code is benchmarked in a way > that the result of the multiplication is output to a file and to > subtract the constant contribution of that to the run time that the > time is measured for various problem sizes (number of matrices). Correction: ... the constant contribution of writing the result to a file should be subtracted from the run time by measuring with various problem sizes. Hope that is understandable now.