Prime lags after extensive processing

[cyrille de brébisson]

Hello,

>> Ram and CPU don't break. They either work or they do not. There is no middle ground that causes issues.
>There is at least one scenario when this is not 100% true. Imagine poor bus timings. Then the ram could work or could not work if the machine gets busy. i.e. gets hot.

Technical correct, However, calculator technology usually trails 'cutting edge' and even normal technology by a couple of years. What this does is give us the safety improvements of the cutting edge, but while using in 10 year old limits.
ie: ram buss is 100Mhz, cpu speed is 400Mhz, but design uses knowledge that was gained on Ghz systems, thus giving us large margins of security.
Crap can always happen, but it is much less likely in these cases than on a computer much closer to the cutting edge.

>>I have not seen your program, but my first guess is that you are not using the most efficient ways to deal with your very large dataset.
>I think if there are inefficient ways that have to be avoided you should point these out.
>How should one know.

I think that this was the crux of my tool analogy, all the programming tools present have good reasons for being there (honestly, some have also bad reasons). But they are all appropriate for some situation, and not for others. Pointing at inefficient combinations is like describing the whole haystack while talking about the needle. Basically most people do not care, it talks a lot of time, and even then, there is probably going to be something missing in the list. I mean, when buying a hammer, there is no sticker on it that says: "not suitable for sinking screws", and even if they was, there are 1000 other things that you could bang on with a hammer that would need to be described...


>>More on the hammer banging on screw analogy:
>> - Keep banging, after all it kinds of work, even if every once in a while it break the hammer (prime in this case)...
>> - Switch to a nail, or a screwdriver (but Prime might NOT have such items, leaving you with no alternatives)
>> - Discover glue?
>Am I reading this correctly? It sounds like:
>a) Deal with it
>b) Buy a different device/calculator
>c) Learn how to build your own device

Nope, absolutely not the meaning that I had in my head when writing it.
I meant that, after realizing that the wrong tool is being used you have 3 choices:
a) Take the decision that, despite the drawbacks, it works well enough for you (and/or) that you do not want to switch/learn a new tool
b) Decide that you will use a different similar tool (which is an investment in time and brain power) as you will need to search what is most appropriate, and learn it. For example look in the manual for alternatives...
c) Find a different way to achieve your goal

For example, I was looking at the upper program and the developer did:
CHAR(MID(s,A,1)). This will work, but is not the best solution. string(A) is smaller, more readable, faster... But not necessary.
Another solution would be to change the way things are done, for example the following 2 lines do a ToUpper...
L1:= ASC(s);
return CHAR(L1-((97<=L1) AND (122>L1))*32);


>>In any complex computer system, the memory can become corrupt, thus causing the system to become unstable.
>Maybe a stupid question, but why haven't you based the Prime on an OS capable of virtual memory management?
No question is stupid, and that was not a possibility at the time.

Regards, Cyrille