Path: news.mathworks.com!not-for-mail
From: <HIDDEN>
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.matlab
Subject: Re: MATLAB Central Spring Contest
Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 05:45:06 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Universit&#228;t Stuttgart
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <fvu411$23l$1@fred.mathworks.com>
References: <fv82i0$nql$1@fred.mathworks.com> <fvsk1d$m84$1@fred.mathworks.com> <fvsmhv$se6$1@fred.mathworks.com> <fvsot0$gr9$1@fred.mathworks.com> <fvsqp9$8gg$1@fred.mathworks.com> <fvstsb$m4n$1@fred.mathworks.com> <fvsv2c$74l$1@fred.mathworks.com> <fvt338$h33$1@fred.mathworks.com>
Reply-To: <HIDDEN>
NNTP-Posting-Host: webapp-02-blr.mathworks.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: fred.mathworks.com 1210225506 2165 172.30.248.37 (8 May 2008 05:45:06 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@mathworks.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 05:45:06 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: MATLAB Central Newsreader 545430
Xref: news.mathworks.com comp.soft-sys.matlab:467305


> > That said, I would support a change to the scoring 
> function
> > such that run time is rounded to the nearest second. That
> > should mostly eliminate the effect of timing variation.

I also support everything that would take the motivation out
of tweaking. But also with the changed timing, a minor time
improvement could lead to a jump from one quantization
interval to the next...

Markus