On Jul 25, 2013, at 4:24 AM, check.nyah wrote: > Sorry, Sean for the mistake I was talking about the bn_mat_determinant() > routine(src/libbn/mat.c:1051). I will do the tests on my proposed routines > and do a comparism to see it its better; but i know it'll be.
Ah, that makes a lot more sense then. I don't doubt that you've made them better, and indeed your patch 216 summary with operation counts sounds very promising that it'll be faster. The main question becomes merely verification that it's correct, which can also be attained by comparison testing. Please do share your test and summarize your testing results here or on the patch itself when you have it. If you need help setting up the test harness, just ask. We seem to end up writing a quick test harness for something ever week. :) Cheers! Sean ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ See everything from the browser to the database with AppDynamics Get end-to-end visibility with application monitoring from AppDynamics Isolate bottlenecks and diagnose root cause in seconds. Start your free trial of AppDynamics Pro today! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48808831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ BRL-CAD Developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/brlcad-devel
