We'll start looking into it here at NIST later this summer. We have some
expressions on the order of 10,000 terms and things do tend to slow down ;>
William
On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Kevin Hunter wrote:
> If you haven't programmed a multi-execution style algorithm before,
> it's a bit
If you haven't programmed a multi-execution style algorithm before,
it's a bit of a mental leap. However, the thought process involved
with multi-threading vs multi-processing vs multi-machine scales.
There is a growing movement to teach college students and younger
folks to think "in parallel" fr
On Jun 22, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Kevin Hunter wrote:
> Man, I'm late to this convo as I'm getting these emails all out of
> thread order and at random times ... corporate filters rock.
You could just use a private email address, such as one from gmail, to
subscribe to this list. (p.s., assumedly
Man, I'm late to this convo as I'm getting these emails all out of
thread order and at random times ... corporate filters rock.
On Jun 22, 12:25 am, William Ratcliff wrote:
> I would go with multiprocessing rather than multithreading--processes are
> "weightier" but there are no side effects
