Ah, ok. Thanks for clarifying this. We probably have the optimum for now. There are other things we can do in our application to get better performance anyway, so we'll focus on those now.
Thanks for all the help! Bill. On 12 August 2016 at 13:46, Kristoffer Carlsson <kcarlsso...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Since they are mutable (I assume) > > They are not. They are basically wrappers around a tuple with conveniently > defined methods on them to make them act like vectors / matrices. You > cannot in Julia store mutable objects inline in an array. > > On Friday, August 12, 2016 at 1:22:44 PM UTC+2, Bill Hart wrote: >> >> Awesome, I didn't realise this. I will definitely give them a try (and >> possibly eventually report back). It very likely makes more sense for our >> application for us to use these than an immutable tuple. Since they are >> mutable (I assume), we can pass them as an argument to a function to be >> written to (as output). Of course I realise there are many applications >> where the immutable tuples are better. >> >> Bill. >> >> On 12 August 2016 at 12:12, Kristoffer Carlsson <kcarl...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> They are bitstypes so if you have a vectoe of them they will be stored >>> "inline" in the vector. >> >> >>
