Fyi, if you run the previous code in order to compare the first two methods on
an ASCII file with 1 million lines of input data, then the results are (had to
increase stacksize on my laptop):
t1 = 206.015 // r=mfscanf() --> mlist
t2 = 13.8685 // M=fscanfMat() --> matrix
i.e., the mfscanf solution seems to become rather slow for very large files
(taking about 3.5 minutes in this last test).
Why is it much slower than fscanfMat?
From: users [mailto:users-boun...@lists.scilab.org] On Behalf Of Samuel Gougeon
Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2016 11:00 PM
To: Users mailing list for Scilab <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [Scilab-users] using csvRead vs mfscanf and fscanfMat
Le 15/10/2016 20:49, Rafael Guerra a écrit :
> The results for a 50,000-lines input ASCII file are:
> time1= 0.686404 // mfscanf
> time2= 0.499203 // fscanfMat
> time3= 35.3966 // csvRead
Thanks for these very convincing results.
I thought that evstr() is vectorized because it is so on my PC, after
having worked on it.
But a trivial improvement was still unsubmitted.
Despite this improvement fasten evstr() by a factor > 10, this is not
enough to reach mfscanf()'s speed.
users mailing list