On 04/20/2012 08:35 PM, Fernando Perez wrote: > On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn > <d.s.seljeb...@astro.uio.no> wrote: >> >> I don't think you gain that much by using a different type though? Those >> optimized code paths could be plugged into NumPy as well. > > Could be: this was years ago, and the bottleneck for me was in the > constructor and in basic arithmetic. I had to make millions of these > vectors and I needed to do basic arithmetic, but they were always 1-d > and had one to 6 entries only. So writing a very static constructor > with very low overhead did make a huge difference in that project.
Oh, right. I was thinking "small" as in "fits in L2 cache", not small as in a few dozen entries. You definitely still need a Cython class then. Dag > > Also, when I wrote this code numpy didn't exist, I was using Numeric. > > Perhaps the same results could be obtained in numpy itself with > judicious coding, I don't know. But in that project, ~600 lines of > really easy pyrex code (it would be cython today) made a *huge* > performance difference for me. _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
