Hey hey,
2013/7/31 Karl Rupp
> Hey,
>
> >> I started going through the code, and you're right, the change isn't
> >> very large. But it makes sense to split it up as you describe, to keep
> >> the different semantics different, and same semantics shared (ie, to
> >> make sure the concepts are
Hey,
>> I started going through the code, and you're right, the change isn't
>> very large. But it makes sense to split it up as you describe, to keep
>> the different semantics different, and same semantics shared (ie, to
>> make sure the concepts are as clear as possible). I also have another
>
Karl Rupp writes:
> Okay, so this shows ~150 us overhead for representing the types as in
> pyviennacl. Compared with a pure CPU-implementation, this is certainly a
> lot.
>
> However, when comparing this with OpenCL, then the overhead is actually
> not too bad and becomes negligible for execut
Hi Toby,
thanks for submitting the evaluation :-)
> Now for the couple of questions...
>
> I'm currently thinking that I need to rewrite the majority of the Python
> expression tree code in C++/Boost.Python, because (as I feared a while
> ago) there's quite a lot of overhead in using pure Python
Hi,
(I'm sending to the list since as well as a response about the
evaluation, I've got a couple of questions..)
Karl Rupp writes:
> this is just to remind you that you need to submit your mid-term
> evaluations by Friday, 19:00 UTC. Feel free to ignore this email if
> you have submitted it alre
