On Do, 2014-05-15 at 12:31 +, Dave Hirschfeld wrote:
As can be seen from the code below (or in the notebook linked beneath) fancy
indexing of a structured array is twice as slow as indexing both fields
independently - making it 4x slower?
I found that fancy indexing was a bottleneck in
On Do, 2014-05-15 at 12:31 +, Dave Hirschfeld wrote:
As can be seen from the code below (or in the notebook linked beneath) fancy
indexing of a structured array is twice as slow as indexing both fields
independently - making it 4x slower?
I found that fancy indexing was a bottleneck in
Sebastian Berg sebastian at sipsolutions.net writes:
On Do, 2014-05-15 at 12:31 +, Dave Hirschfeld wrote:
As can be seen from the code below (or in the notebook linked beneath)
fancy
indexing of a structured array is twice as slow as indexing both fields
independently - making it
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Sebastian Berg
sebast...@sipsolutions.net wrote:
On Do, 2014-05-15 at 12:31 +, Dave Hirschfeld wrote:
As can be seen from the code below (or in the notebook linked beneath) fancy
indexing of a structured array is twice as slow as indexing both fields
Julian Taylor jtaylor.debian at googlemail.com writes:
if ~50% faster is fast enough a simple improvement would be to replace
the use of PyArg_ParseTuple with manual tuple unpacking.
The PyArg functions are incredibly slow and is not required in
VOID_copyswap which just extracts 'Oi.
On 16.05.2014 10:59, Dave Hirschfeld wrote:
Julian Taylor jtaylor.debian at googlemail.com writes:
if ~50% faster is fast enough a simple improvement would be to replace
the use of PyArg_ParseTuple with manual tuple unpacking.
The PyArg functions are incredibly slow and is not required in
