[VA] SRC #012a - Then and Now: Probability

[J-F Garnier]

(10-17-2022 06:29 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  The results are in: it took around 4 hours to run the 30, 60 scenario on the pure-BASIC 1403H program.

What is the numeric result? I'm curious to compare the accuracy too, is the 1403H a 12-digit machine and does it manage the "round-to -even" rule? I gave a simple test to check it above.

(10-17-2022 08:16 PM)Albert Chan Wrote:  Here is a version that simulate swapping of array name.
Array P of x ≡ A(P, x)
Array Q of x ≡ A(Q, X)
Note: P, Q are now numbers 0 or 1, P+Q=1, not the array itself.
[..]

20 OPTION BASE 0 @ REAL A(1,(R+1)*(R+4)/2) @ P=0

I don't see the benefit of this version, you are still using the same amount of memory, and the access to the array A is slower which is not compensated by the gain of the MAT copy.

(10-17-2022 09:36 PM)Albert Chan Wrote:  When I time MAT P=ZER vs. MAT P=(0), I see no difference.

There is a difference, MAT P=ZER is about 2x faster:
10 DIM A(4096)
20 T=TIME @ MAT A=ZER @ T=TIME-T @ DISP T
20 T=TIME @ MAT A=(0) @ T=TIME-T @ DISP T
>RUN
.38
.76
(physical HP-71B)
However, if you target the smallest code, MAT A=(0) is one byte shorter :-)

J-F