[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: reshape slowdown?
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: reshape slowdown? |
Date: |
Tue, 22 Feb 2005 08:29:14 -0500 |
On 22-Feb-2005, David Bateman <address@hidden> wrote:
| I did change the reshape function between 2.1.57 and 2.1.58 for NDArrays
| as you say. If it is two times slower for 2D arrays, we should probably
| special case the 2D version and use the old code... Want to propose a
| change?
Or at least some test cases so we can gather some data about the
performance? What size matrices does it really affect, etc.?
jwe
-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.
Octave's home on the web: http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects: http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information: http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------
- reshape slowdown?, Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2005/02/21
- Re: reshape slowdown?, David Bateman, 2005/02/22
- Re: reshape slowdown?,
John W. Eaton <=
- False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?), Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2005/02/22
- False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?), John W. Eaton, 2005/02/22
- Re: False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?), Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2005/02/22
- Re: False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?), Francesco Potorti`, 2005/02/23
- Re: False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?), mavram, 2005/02/23
- Re: False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?), Paul Kienzle, 2005/02/23
- Re: False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?), Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2005/02/25
- Re: False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?), John W. Eaton, 2005/02/23