search for: franknarf

(I asked this question on StackOverflow <http://stackoverflow.com/q/30035939/1191259> a short time ago; sorry if you're seeing it again. Feel free to answer there as well if you like. The code formatting and such on that site can be nice.) I benchmarked matrix and vector subsetting to extract the diagonal of a square matrix against the diag() function, and the latter lost by a wide

...as made many years ago, but this was before names were handled explicitly. It would definitely be better to not force the duplicate, at least in the case where we are sure c() and [ would not dispatch. Best, luke On Mon, 4 May 2015, peter dalgaard wrote: > >> On 04 May 2015, at 19:59 , franknarf <by.hook.or at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> But I'm still wondering why diag() uses c()...? With it being so slow, I'd >> be inclined to write a qdiag() without the c() and just use that the next >> time I need matrix algebra. Any insight would be appreciated; thank...

> On 04 May 2015, at 19:59 , franknarf <by.hook.or at gmail.com> wrote: > > But I'm still wondering why diag() uses c()...? With it being so slow, I'd > be inclined to write a qdiag() without the c() and just use that the next > time I need matrix algebra. Any insight would be appreciated; thanks! Well, there...

...es were > handled explicitly. It would definitely be better to not force the > duplicate, at least in the case where we are sure c() and [ would not > dispatch. > > Best, > > luke > > On Mon, 4 May 2015, peter dalgaard wrote: > > >> On 04 May 2015, at 19:59 , franknarf <by.hook.or at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> But I'm still wondering why diag() uses c()...? With it being so slow, >>> I'd >>> be inclined to write a qdiag() without the c() and just use that the next >>> time I need matrix algebra. Any insigh...