On 20.01.2013, at 19:14, Jens Axel Søgaard <jensa...@soegaard.net> wrote:
> 2013/1/20 Berthold Bäuml <berthold.bae...@dlr.de>: > >> With the ffi-binding example from Jens (thank you!) I get for the 1000x1000 >> multiply 450ms -- only 2x slower than Mathematica or Numpy. So integrating >> such a binding in math/matrix looks promising. > > Huh? I am surprised it is twice as slow. > > Ah! The Numpy example uses floats and not doubles. On my machine Numpy says it is using float64, hence, double. big1.dtype.name -> float64 >> Nevertheless, my original motivation for the little test was to get an >> impression of >> what performance could be achieved in purely Typed Racket for numerical >> algorithms. Would it in principle be possible to come close to pure C-code >> performance (using the same algorithm) when using a floating-point- >> implementation? > > Let's try and write a matrix* that works for matrices represented as > vectors of floats and see how fast it is. Looking forward what is possible! Berthold > /Jens Axel -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Berthold Bäuml DLR, Robotics and Mechatronics Center (RMC) Münchner Str. 20, D-82234 Wessling Phone +49 8153 282489 http://www.robotic.de/Berthold.Baeuml ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
