[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: profiler and/or debugger, loops vs vectorization

From: Michael Creel
Subject: Re: profiler and/or debugger, loops vs vectorization
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 11:16:28 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20060615)

John W. Eaton wrote:

In any case, comparing Octave vs. Matlab on a for loop is not really a
fair comparison.  If you are wondering when Octave will have the same
kind of JIT capability, then the answer is when someone contributes
the code to do it, or provides sufficient funding to make it happen.

I think that it's a fair comparison, it's just not a favorable one for Octave, at the moment. Acknowledging the differences is important, so that people don't have unmet expectations when they try Octave. Octave does have some important advantages, too. For example, running parallel code. With Octave, the size of the cluster is limited by the number of machines you have. With Matlab it's limited by how many licenses you have, each of which is not cheap.

I find that judicious use of C code to eliminate bottlenecks is pretty easy to do, and works well. The Octave matrix classes make writing the C code almost fun.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]