cellfun vs. parcellfun: speed

[Muhali]

I had always thought of parcellfun as being a faster version of cellfun.
Until today, where I encountered a stunning example of cellfun being MUCH
faster than parcellfun. In decreasing order:

octave> tic ; parcellfun (4, @isempty, cell(1,100000)) ; disp(toc);
parcellfun: 100000/100000 jobs done
 12.17
octave> tic ; parcellfun (4, @isempty, cell(1,100000), "VerboseLevel", 0) ;
disp(toc);
 7.3
octave> tic ; cellfun (@isempty, cell(1,100000)) ; disp(toc);
 0.065

So why should one use parcellfun? - Or is something not working as expected?

M.




--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/cellfun-vs-parcellfun-speed-tp4643678.html
Sent from the Octave - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.