Oh dear, sorry, I should have read your email more carefully. Matthew
On 3/8/07, Daniel Mahler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/8/07, Matthew Brett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > My problem is not space, but time. > > > > I am creating a small array over and over, > > > > and this is turning out to be a bottleneck. > > > > How about making one large random number array and taking small views? > > > > How is that different from: > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Allocating all the arrays as one n+1 dim and grabbing rows from it > is faster than allocating the small arrays individually. > I am iterating too many times to allocate everything at once though. > I can just do a nested loop > where create manageably large arrays in the outer > and grab the rows in the inner, > but I wanted something cleaner. > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > later in the post > > > Matthew > > Daniel > > > _______________________________________________ > > Numpy-discussion mailing list > > Numpy-discussion@scipy.org > > http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > > > _______________________________________________ > Numpy-discussion mailing list > Numpy-discussion@scipy.org > http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
