Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 15:32:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 15:30:49 -0400 Received: from zeus.kernel.org ([204.152.189.113]:27041 "EHLO zeus.kernel.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 23 Sep 2002 14:41:37 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 11:34:52 -0500 From: Oliver Xymoron To: Con Kolivas Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] Corrected gcc3.2 v gcc2.95.3 contest results Message-ID: <20020923163452.GF9726@waste.org> References: <1032791089.3d8f2431231ac@kolivas.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1032791089.3d8f2431231ac@kolivas.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 955 Lines: 20 On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 12:24:49AM +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: > > That is the system I was considering. I just need to run enough > benchmarks to make this worthwhile though. That means about 5 for > each it seems - which may take me a while. A basic mean will suffice > for a measure of central tendency. I also need to quote some measure > of variability. Standard deviation? No, standard deviation is inappropriate here. We have no reason to expect the distribution of problem cases to be normal or even smooth. What we'd really like is range and mean. Don't throw out the outliers either, the pathological cases are of critical interest. -- "Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.." - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/