Re: STL container question

From:

=?UTF-8?B?RXJpayBXaWtzdHLDtm0=?= <Erik-wikstrom@telia.com>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.c++

Date:

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:49:42 GMT

Message-ID:

<WQ7Fk.2965$U5.12457@newsb.telia.net>

On 2008-10-02 16:11, Victor Bazarov wrote:

Ioannis Vranos wrote:

The program had a serious bug.

> [...]
>
>

And my results:

1. const size_t SIZE= 90000;

john@john-desktop:~/Projects/src$ ./foobar_cpp

Creating vector with 90000 elements... Done!

Filling list with vector elements... Done!

Timing the sorting of the vector... Done!

Timing the sorting of the list... Done!

The sorting of the vector took 24.79 seconds

The sorting of the list took 0.1 seconds

I managed to duplicate your results once, but only once. Despite
numerous tries your code consistently shows the vector being at least an
order of magnitude faster. Make sure your are not running other CPU-
intensive applications while running the test.

The system I tested on is DELL T7400 (dual Intel Xeon quad core), Vista
Ultimate 64, Visual C++ 2008 sp1, 4 gigs of RAM. Since no parallelizing
is done in your program, the number of cores doesn't matter, but the CPU
is faster, and while I would love to try it on a 16-gigabyte machine or
better, I don't have access to one. My machine is what our clients are
getting, so the results stand. You're free to speculate what makes it
so *bad* on your machine, but I'd seriously think about switching to a
real OS and a real compiler, if I got such bad results as you do.

Long since I last heard anyone calling Linux and gcc toy products. :-)

--
Erik Wikstr??m