Re: Tilting at Windmills?

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg62172] Re: Tilting at Windmills?*From*: "Matt" <anonmous69 at netscape.net>*Date*: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 02:08:52 -0500 (EST)*References*: <dl4a92$j1q$1@smc.vnet.net>*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Hi Phil, I tried both your solution and Luc's. They were both blindingly fast. On my computer I ran the tests 4 times each with a list size of 200000 integers, and got the following timing results for both yours and Luc's respectively: 0.125 Second 0.047 Second I did modify your solution slightly, because in its original form, it didn't produce output exactly as I wanted (there was an additional element at the start and end of the resultant list), so this what the modified form became: duplicatedData= Flatten[Transpose[{x,x}]] ret = Delete[Transpose[{Drop[duplicatedData, -1], Drop[duplicatedData, 1]}], {{1}, {-1}}]; My original solution came in at 3.688 seconds in the same run. My solution has the added drawback, that once you go much beyond a list size of 200000, the kernel would simply vanish with no error reported back to the front-end. I have a feeling that I exceeded some internal limit on the number of allowable nestings for lists, which in turn, led to some sort of stack overflow. In Windows-based systems, a process disappearing without a trace (no error msg, no error logs, etc.) is a strong sign of stack overflow. In the other solutions presented (including yours), if I took the list size too high, I'd simply get an error about memory being exhausted, which is what one would expect. Anyway, thank you for taking the liberty, it's much appreciated! Matt