[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?)
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?) |
Date: |
Tue, 22 Feb 2005 13:05:22 -0500 |
On 22-Feb-2005, Dmitri A. Sergatskov <address@hidden> wrote:
| I am sorry -- the reshape really does not take any time. I overlooked
| that I have a=b' in the loop that does go slower than before, but that,
| I think, relates to the different lapack/blas version. It is still
| somewhat weird, as most other lapack functions perform the same or even
| faster than before...
Transpose is not implemented with lapack or blas functions. I suppose
it could be due to changing from 2-d to N-d arrays, but I don't see
anything obvious that would account for a slowdown.
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, 2005/02/22
- False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?), Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2005/02/22
- False alarm (Re: reshape slowdown?),
John W. Eaton <=
- 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