You bet, Vector implements Iterable<Vector.Element>! In the case of SparseVector it only hits the nonzero elements.
I wonder if we can tighten up the contract of Vector in this respect: - can it really not guarantee in-order iteration? this seems intuitive and maybe useful - should state it may not (will not?) hit elements that are zero? On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Ted Dunning<ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > Do we have a good way to iterate over non-zero elements? > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org>wrote: > >> I'm doing some more profiling and it seems like all over the place we are >> looping from i = 0; i < size() and calling getQuick. This is then, for >> SparseVector, dominated by the find lookup, which is taking up a lot of >> time. >> >> So, it's not that find() is slow, but the fact that we are needlessly >> calling getQuick() for loops. >> >> Just an FYI as we go forward not to do that. >> >> >
