search for: inefficiency

In do_matrix in src/array.c there is a type switch containing : case LGLSXP : for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) for (j = 0; j < nc; j++) LOGICAL(ans)[i + j * NR] = NA_LOGICAL; That seems page inefficient, iiuc. Think it should be : case LGLSXP : for (j = 0; j < nc; j++) for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) LOGICAL(ans)[i + j * NR] = NA_LOGICAL; or more simply : case

hi, i'm really in trouble to simulate some experiment. that is, it takes too much time to process the following code. following is short example, ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- p<-data.frame(a=rnorm(10),b=rnorm(10),c=rnorm(10),d=rnorm(10)) test<-data.frame(a=rnorm(1),b=rnorm(1),c=rnorm(1),d=rnorm(1))

Hi, Consider ConstantUniqueMap::getOrCreate() (in lib/VMCore/ConstantsContext.h): /// getOrCreate - Return the specified constant from the map, creating it if /// necessary. ConstantClass *getOrCreate(const TypeClass *Ty, ValRefType V) { MapKey Lookup(Ty, V); ConstantClass* Result = 0; ... For array (or struct or vector) constants, typically: ValType = vector<Constant*>

On Jun 24, 2011, at 8:28 AM, Jay Foad wrote: > Hi, > > Consider ConstantUniqueMap::getOrCreate() (in lib/VMCore/ConstantsContext.h): > > /// getOrCreate - Return the specified constant from the map, creating it if > /// necessary. > ConstantClass *getOrCreate(const TypeClass *Ty, ValRefType V) { > MapKey Lookup(Ty, V); > ConstantClass* Result = 0; > ...

Hi, Can someone technically explain, why does it take so long with loops in R? Thanks, Vehbi Sinan Tunalioglu

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1665 Summary: prefix_pton is inefficient Product: py-radix Version: -current Platform: ix86 OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: Default AssignedTo: unassigned-bugs at mindrot.org ReportedBy: weinholt at

Patches item #16627, was opened at 2007-12-26 21:13 You can respond by visiting: http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=413&aid=16627&group_id=85 Category: win32-service Group: Code Cleanup Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 3 Submitted By: Nobody (None) Assigned to: Nobody (None) Summary: Replace inefficient busy wait loop with UDP/IP loopback socket. Initial Comment:

If anyone wants to see a prime example of how inefficient it is to program in SAS, take a look at the SAS programs provided by the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality for risk adjusting and reporting for hospital outcomes at http://www.qualityindicators.ahrq.gov/software.htm . The PSSASP3.SAS program is a prime example. Look at how you do a vector product in the SAS macro

What should a well behaved back end do with a load or store with alignment less than the natural alignment of the type? I believe C++ considers such access to be UB. I'm not sure what the IR semantics are. I think my options are: - Delete the operation / use undef - Lower as if it is naturally aligned - Lower via inefficient code that assumes align 1 Thanks, Jon -------------- next part

Thanks for the response, Jerry. Is there a way for me to verify this is happening? Winbindd has been running for a few days now, and I just did a netstat and the only connections to a DC are to the off-site one, the PDC. Thanks. Sven -----Original Message----- From: Gerald (Jerry) Carter [mailto:jerry@samba.org] Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 10:19 PM To: SRuth@LANDAM.com Cc:

While doing some performance testing with the new version of pqR (see pqR-project.org), I've encountered an extreme, and quite unnecessary, inefficiency in the current R Core implementation of R, which I think you might want to correct. The inefficiency is in access to columns of a data frame, as in expressions such as df$col[i], which I think are very common (the alternatives of df[i,"col"] and df[["col"]][i] are, I think, les...

dear R experts--- t <- 1:30 f <- function(t) { cat("f for", t, "\n"); return(2*t) } g <- function(t) { cat("g for", t, "\n"); return(3*t) } s <- ifelse( t%%2==0, g(t), f(t)) shows that the ifelse function actually evaluates both f() and g() for all values first, and presumably then just picks left or right results based on t%%2.

...d alltogether? But may be I'm wrong... - Roman ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ---- Von: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> An: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Gesendet: Donnerstag, den 24. April 2008, 02:07:55 Uhr Betreff: Re: [LLVMdev] FoldingSetNodeID operations inefficiency On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Roman Levenstein wrote: > Hi, > > While profiling LLVM using my test-cases with huge MBBs, I noticed that > FoldingSetNodeID operations (ComputeHash,insertion,etc) may become > really inefficient for the nodes, which have very many operands. Here is a stupid id...

The current vsock code for removal of socket from the list is both subject to race and inefficient. It takes the lock, checks whether the socket is in the list, drops the lock and if the socket was on the list, deletes it from the list. This is subject to race because as soon as the lock is dropped once it is checked for presence, that condition cannot be relied upon for any decision. It is also

The current vsock code for removal of socket from the list is both subject to race and inefficient. It takes the lock, checks whether the socket is in the list, drops the lock and if the socket was on the list, deletes it from the list. This is subject to race because as soon as the lock is dropped once it is checked for presence, that condition cannot be relied upon for any decision. It is also

Hello, I've made some changes in the libvorbis-1.2.3 source code to introduce some functionality I need for a project I'm working on. For compilation, besides including some macro definitions I need to pass to the C preprocessor, and linking with the math library somewhere (and including the source files I've implemented, of course) I've made no big changes in the Makefile or

Hello Ralph, many thanks for your fast reply and help with this issue! :-) Am 31.08.2017 um 15:43 schrieb Ralph Böhme: > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 03:37:07PM +0200, awl1 via samba wrote: >> Before I follow your advice to move this whole issue/topic to the >> samba-technical alias and start over there with a clean description of the >> scenario and the findings, I have two

Dear all, I am relatively new to R. I would like to know how can we write the realizations (for example generated through rnorm or runif) in to a data file. It would be very inefficient to first generate values and then write them in to file using "write" function. Instead, is there a way to generate 1 value at a time and append them in to the file. The question might be trivial to

Hi, Recently added to doc/NEWS.Rd: 'R CMD check' now gives a warning rather than a note if it finds inefficiently compressed datasets. With 'bzip2' and 'xz' compression having been available since R 2.10.0, there is no excuse for not using them. Why isn't a note enough for this? Generally speaking, warnings are for things that are dangerous, or unsafe,

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1426 Bug ID: 1426 Summary: Inefficient command lookup on errors Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: nft Assignee: pablo at netfilter.org