On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Judd Taylor <[email protected]>wrote:

> The truth is that doing anything on the extremes requires a programmer
> be clever. PDL just allows you to do this better than Perl.
>
> Even the might Perl TIMTOWTDI runs out of ideas when it comes to
> computing huge datasets like this. At the very minimum, PDL allowore
> alternatives at being clever to make these things work quickly.
>
> For me personally, if I want something very simple that is guaranteed to
> be very fast, I go immediately to PDL::PP and write a quick sub to do
> this. You can spend 5 minutes using Inline PDL::PP to develop what
> works, and then put the code in a library somewhere for future use. You
> get code that's easier to maintain that way, IMO, as it doesn't need to
> be as "clever" as the perl level PDL code.
>
> -Judd
>

Writing a quick sub using PDL::PP is fantastically simple - if you know what
you're doing. This is why I wanted to have my first talk be on PDL::PP, not
PLplot. But the masses spoke, and I focused on plotting instead.

I work with datasets with thousands of elements, and I recently replaced two
perl nested for-loops with an Inline::Pdlpp sub. The compute time went from
a few seconds to seemingly instantaneous feedback. Unfortunately, there's no
genlte introduction to using PDL::PP.

David

-- 
Sent via my carrier pigeon.
_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl

Reply via email to