Return-Path: <john.harrison-request@uk.ac.cam.cl>
Delivery-Date: 
Received: from ted.cs.uidaho.edu (no rfc931) by swan.cl.cam.ac.uk 
          with SMTP (PP-6.4); Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:24:54 +0000
Received: by ted.cs.uidaho.edu (16.6/1.34) id AA18370;
          Thu, 21 Jan 93 08:21:36 -0800
Sender: info-hol-request@edu.uidaho.cs.ted
Errors-To: info-hol-request@edu.uidaho.cs.ted
Precedence: bulk
Received: from [131.159.0.81] by ted.cs.uidaho.edu (16.6/1.34) id AA18361;
          Thu, 21 Jan 93 08:17:56 -0800
Received: from sunbroy14.informatik.tu-muenchen.de ([131.159.0.114]) 
          by tuminfo2.informatik.tu-muenchen.de with SMTP id <57698>;
          Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:15:55 +0100
Received: by sunbroy14.informatik.tu-muenchen.de id <8121>;
          Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:15:44 +0100
From: Konrad Slind <slind@de.tu-muenchen.informatik>
To: info-hol@edu.uidaho.cs.ted
Subject: benchmarks
Message-Id: <93Jan21.171544met.8121@sunbroy14.informatik.tu-muenchen.de>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:15:31 +0100


 I haven't been getting any info-hol messages because of some glitch or
other, but I will note that the "benchmark" is a toy example (used to be
it wasn't, but machines got faster). As always, do your own tests on
your own problems and remember the saying "There's lies, damn lies, and
then there's benchmarks"

Konrad.