Thanks Elihah, that's basically what I'm doing. Is there a speed advantage to using float-vector-set! over plain old set! ?
On Sat, Apr 2, 2022 at 5:47 PM Elijah Stone <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry, should be > > (do ((i 0 (+ 1 i)) > (l (length v))) > ((>= i l)) > (float-vector-set! v i (f (float-vector-ref v i)))) > > On Sat, 2 Apr 2022, Elijah Stone wrote: > > > Probably: > > > > (do ((i 0 (+ 1 i)) > > (l (length v))) > > (>= i l) > > (float-vector-set! v i (f (float-vector-ref v i)))) > > > > Obviously substituting int-vector-* or byte-vector-* if appropriate. > > > > That said, if performance is really important, I might just write the > code in > > c. > > > > On Sat, 2 Apr 2022, Iain Duncan wrote: > > > >> Hi all, I'm mapping some transforms over vectors in a part of the code > that > >> I need to have run as efficiently as possible. I'm hoping someone can > tell > >> me what the fastest running approach to this is. I would like to leave > the > >> data as vector as it is used in a framebuffer at the C level. > >> thanks! > >> iain > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Cmdist mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://cm-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/cmdist > > > _______________________________________________ > Cmdist mailing list > [email protected] > https://cm-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/cmdist >
_______________________________________________ Cmdist mailing list [email protected] https://cm-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/cmdist
