I just tried out the effects of using R's NA value¹ with C arithmetic
on an amd64 linux box.
I always got a NAN result for which R's R_IsNA() would return true.
At least on this platform, NAN's propagate w/o a change in their
lower 32 bits.
If NA is supposed to propagate the way NaN is spec'ed
On 2010-08-24 05:37, Kasper Daniel Hansen wrote:
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Radford Nealradf...@cs.toronto.edu wrote:
On Aug 23, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Radford Neal wrote:
In particular, all matrix x vector and vector x matrix products will
in this version be done in the matprod
On 24 August 2010 at 09:13, Göran Broström wrote:
|
| On 2010-08-24 05:37, Kasper Daniel Hansen wrote:
| On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Radford Nealradf...@cs.toronto.edu
wrote:
| On Aug 23, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Radford Neal wrote:
|
| In particular, all matrix x vector and vector x matrix
Regarding my previous message on speeding up matrix multiplies, I've
realized that the size of the result matrix is not really the right
criterion for deciding to do the computation without using the Fortran
routine. A better criterion would be based on the ratio of the time
for the matrix
On Aug 23, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Radford Neal wrote:
Regarding my previous message on speeding up matrix multiplies, I've
realized that the size of the result matrix is not really the right
criterion for deciding to do the computation without using the Fortran
routine. A better criterion would
On Aug 23, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Radford Neal wrote:
In particular, all matrix x vector and vector x matrix products will
in this version be done in the matprod routine, not the Fortran routine.
And this is the right thing to do, since the time for the ISNAN check
before calling the Fortan
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Radford Neal radf...@cs.toronto.edu wrote:
On Aug 23, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Radford Neal wrote:
In particular, all matrix x vector and vector x matrix products will
in this version be done in the matprod routine, not the Fortran routine.
And this is the right
