Re: the competition's expm vs ours

[Javier Fernández]

address@hidden wrote:
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: the competition's expm vs ours ( Jordi Guti?rrez Hermoso )
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 2008/11/12 David Bateman <address@hidden>:
> > Jordi Guti?rrez Hermoso wrote:
> > > I just ran into a "benchmark" in a blog somewhere that suggests that
> > > our expm is slower than Matlab's.
> > Jaroslav can probably do a better job at that than I can as he worked on
> > this part of the code... However, can you put us to the benchmark?
>
> It wasn't anything impressive. Just ran expm a couple of times on
> rand(300), and we lost by a factor of 8 or so. I can't find it again.
> :-/

Googlin for "expm benchmark octave matlab" gives this thread as second 
hit (first hit is of course this thread :-)

http://www.wilmott.com/messageview.cfm?catid=19&threadid=41499&STARTPAGE=2#336461
http://www.wilmott.com/messageview.cfm?catid=19&threadid=41499&STARTPAGE=2#337667

But I think the second post (octave timing) is on a different computer 
than the first one (Matlab & Mathematica).

I have recently seen benchmarks against old octave versions (2.9.10), 
even for software released few months ago
http://cermics.enpc.fr/~jpc/nsp-tiddly/mine.html
(click on "Benchmark")

I think Jaroslav's indexing improvements are included in 3.0.3 but not 
in previous versions, aren't they?

-javier