Just to be clear, this does:
currentVector-otherVector ?

currentVector.assign(otherVector, Functions.minus);



On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 2:57 AM, Jake Mannix <jake.man...@gmail.com> wrote:

> to do subtractFrom, you can instead just do
>
>  Vector.assign(otherVector, Functions.minus);
>
> The problem is that while DenseVector has an optimization here: if the
> BinaryFunction passed in is additive (it's an instance of PlusMult),
> sparse iteration over "otherVector" is executed, applying the binary
> function and mutating self.  AbstractVector should have this optimization
> in general, as it would be useful in RandomAccessSparseVector (although
> not terribly useful in SequentialAccessSparseVector, but still better than
> current).
>
>  -jake
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Robin Anil <robin.a...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I just had to change it at one place(and the tests pass, which is scary).
> > Canopy is really fast now :). Still could be pushed
> > Now the bottleneck is minus
> >
> > maybe a subtractFrom on the lines of addTo? or a mutable negate function
> > for
> > vector, before adding to
> >
> > Robin
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 2:43 AM, Jake Mannix <jake.man...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I use it (addTo) in decomposer, for exactly this performance issue.
> > > Changing
> > > plus into addTo requires care, because since plus() leaves arguments
> > > immutable,
> > > there may be code which *assumes* that this is the case, and doing
> > addTo()
> > > leaves side effects which might not be expected.  This bit me hard on
> svd
> > > migration, because I had other assumptions about mutability in there.
> > >
> > >  -jake
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Robin Anil <robin.a...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > ah! Its not being used anywhere :). Should we make that a big task
> > before
> > > > 0.3 ? Sweep through code(mainly clustering) and change all these
> > things.
> > > >
> > > > Robin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 2:36 AM, Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Isn't this basically what assign() is for?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 9:04 PM, Robin Anil <robin.a...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > Now the big perf bottle neck is immutability
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Say for plus its doing vector.clone() before doing anything else.
> > > > > > There should be both immutable and mutable plus functions
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to