I may be missing the point here, but wouldn't it be easier to define sumf
as a macro?
macro sumf(f, xs)
quote
s = 0.0
x = $(esc(xs))
for i = 1:length(x)
s += $(esc(f))(x[i])
end
s
end
end
@sumf(sinc_plus_x, x)
This is just as fast and has the advantage that it will work when f is only
in the local scope.
On Saturday, 17 May 2014 11:50:56 UTC+1, Tim Holy wrote:
>
> On Friday, May 16, 2014 02:36:03 PM [email protected] <javascript:>wrote:
> > - The solver need to be fast and for that, inlining is of paramount
> > importance. I know that there is no way to inline F for the time being.
> Do
> > we expect inlining on function argument in the near future of Julia ?
>
> I can't speak for when this will happen in a "nice" way, but using Julia's
> metaprogramming capabilities there is a (somewhat ugly) way to get what
> you
> want. Since I'm planning to use this trick myself shortly, I created a
> little
> demonstration:
>
> https://gist.github.com/timholy/bdcee95f9b7725214d8b
>
> If you prefer, you don't have to separate out the definition of the body
> from
> the eval(quote...end) part, I just did it that way to better illustrate
> the
> separate ideas.
>
> --Tim
>
>
