Re: octave_rand::scalar() v. randn

[Michael Creel]

On Wednesday 23 February 2005 03:19, Steve C. Thompson wrote:
> Group,
>
> I've ask about this yesterday, but I will simplify the question.
>
> Say you write a C++ program using the Octave headers (then make it into
> an .oct module) which returns a vector of 1e7 Gaussian distributed
> numbers.  Comparing the speed of this to randn(1,1e7), I've found randn
> to be much much faster than calling octave_rand::scalar() many times.
>
> I will be adding more to this later.  I've converted a simple simulation
> into C++, made the .oct file, and compared the performance to a
> vectorized m-file-only simulation.  The pure m-file simulation runs
> faster!  Try to explain that.
>
> I will be following up source code and more explanation.  But I thought
> that maybe one of you would know about octave_rand::scalar() v. randn.
>
> Thanks,
> Steve

Do you have octave-forge installed? The randn in octave-forge is already 
an .oct file

Michael



-------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------