Re: How do I replace this "for" loop?

[Keith Goodman]

OK. That window border theme is a little better.

On 5/31/05, Tom Holroyd <address@hidden> wrote:
> Oops!  There was a(nother) bug in my script -- the original line
> was
> 
>          x = 2*(x>p);
> 
> but it should have been
> 
>          x = 2*x(x>p);
> 
> and the really astonishing part is, the second line is faster.
> In fact (see attached graph), it shows that in this case, find is
> *never* faster than using logical indexing.  Not only that, even
> the logical indexing gets faster as the number of elements
> selected decreases!  I'm not sure why that is.
> 
> The first line involves conversion of a logical array to a double
> array, which has nothing to do with the original task.
> 
> Dr. Tom Holroyd
> "A man of genius makes no mistakes. His errors are volitional and
> are the portals of discovery." -- James Joyce
> 
>



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