You have too short timings for them to say much at all. As you can see you have large variations in the times even after the first run. It is likely that myfunc2 and myfunc takes virtually the same time since the cost of copying the array is insignificant to the work that wordcloud has to do. As you can see in the allocation part, you only save ~400 bytes allocated out of a total of 20 000 in the wordcloud function.
On Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 11:20:04 PM UTC+2, Charles Santana wrote: > > Many thanks, guys! Indeed reshape(a,length(a)) is much faster than doing > in the simplest way. However, it brings another question: > > When I ran the command: > > function myfunc1(corpus) > wc = wordcloud(x = corpus[:]) > end > > function myfunc2(corpus) > wc = wordcloud(x = reshape(corpus,length(corpus))) > end > > I get the following performance: > > @time myfunc1(corpus) > > 1st running: 398.202 milliseconds (452 k allocations: 17406 KB) > 2nd running: 144.181 microseconds (374 allocations: 20832 bytes) > 3rd running: 99.270 microseconds (374 allocations: 20832 bytes) > 4th running: 93.860 microseconds (374 allocations: 20832 bytes) > > @time myfunc2(corpus) > > 1st running: 4.102 milliseconds (2667 allocations: 136 KB) > 2nd running: 110.182 microseconds (375 allocations: 20464 bytes) > 3rd running: 130.949 microseconds (375 allocations: 20464 bytes) > 4th running: 120.142 microseconds (375 allocations: 20464 bytes) > > It is clear that it is much faster and occupies much less memory in the > first running. And actually I only need to run it once. However I am > curious to know why would myfunc2 be slower than the myfunc1 as the number > of running increase? > > Thanks for everything! > > Best, > > Charles > > On 10 September 2015 at 19:24, Steven G. Johnson <steve...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> >> >> On Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 10:39:58 AM UTC-4, Seth wrote: >>> >>> would vec() also work for you? It's supposed to be pretty fast. >>> >>>> <http://www.imedea.uib-csic.es/~charles> >>>> >>> >> vec(a) is equivalent to reshape(a, length(a)), and is fast because it >> doesn't make a copy of the data. >> > > > > -- > Um axé! :) > > -- > Charles Novaes de Santana, PhD > http://www.imedea.uib-csic.es/~charles >
