>>> A future optimization would be the @cython.boundscheck(False) directive. >> >> Do you mean future as in "don't try to use it now" or "should use it >> if it's safe to proceed without boundary checking"? Also, this looks >> like a decorator to me, but I couldn't compile when I put it in front >> of my function definition. > > Did you import cython?
You'd think I could catch something like that.... from now on, coffee before code. > 10^4 still isn't a huge array, but I would be curious how much a speed > increase you could get without unrolling all your loops (i.e. a minimal > modification to your code). Might be 1.6, might not be. I've now rewritten the cython code so that it is identical to the fortran, and now cython is ~10% slower than fortran but much cleaner-looking. Thanks. > This is due to the fact that the array processing happens at near the same > speed, so as the array gets larger, the (relative) significance of the > Python function call overhead goes away. That makes sense; the python overhead is increasing proportional to n and the overall execution time proportional to n^2. Thanks everyone, I think I now understand cython well enough to make some code without help next time. I was slow to figure out that cython really is c/fortran loop-style coding with python syntax. Adam _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
