Stream: Google Code-in

Topic: Blog


view this post on Zulip Mahdi (Dec 29 2017 at 02:30):

Yeah! I finished my first post a couple days ago and am hoping to get some more done in the next couple of days. Here's the link if you want to check it out: https://googlecodein2017.wordpress.com/
@Mitesh @Lucas Prieels

view this post on Zulip Sean (Dec 29 2017 at 15:47):

That's an outstanding article Mahdi. :)

view this post on Zulip Sean (Dec 29 2017 at 15:47):

Interesting that you get those results without -msse2 -DHAVE_SSE2

view this post on Zulip Lucas Prieels (Dec 30 2017 at 00:20):

That's really well written: I'm impressed!

view this post on Zulip Lucas Prieels (Dec 30 2017 at 00:26):

@Sean @Mahdi I've also solved this task and I ran my program with 1000000 iterations too so that we can compare our results. I've found approximately the same time for bn_randmt and SFMT (which is interesting because I used msse2 but it doesn't seem to be faster). On the other hand, for the STL rand I found a number totally different: 4114 instead of 11461 (even faster than SFMT)! That's because I didn't use the same implementation as you.

view this post on Zulip Lucas Prieels (Dec 30 2017 at 00:28):

Actually, I've checked and my implementation of bn_randmt is much faster (7287 instead of 19560) even though I used the exact same implementation as you, probably because I didn't compile it with CMake

view this post on Zulip Sean (Dec 30 2017 at 06:26):

You'd have to compile with more than just -msse2 .. SFMT takes a flag to use SSE2. Without it, I found it to be on par with STL's, but with it, cuts the time way down.

view this post on Zulip Mahdi (Dec 31 2017 at 03:42):

Could you send me your .cpp file? I'd like to check it out and see what I'm doing wrong

view this post on Zulip Lucas Prieels (Dec 31 2017 at 09:10):

Sure! But I don't think you're doing anything wrong, maybe it's just the compilation process which change something


Last updated: Oct 09 2024 at 00:44 UTC