| Re: IDL subroutine improvements [message #15098 is a reply to message #15083] |
Wed, 21 April 1999 00:00   |
Craig Markwardt
Messages: 1869
Registered: November 1996
|
Senior Member |
|
|
wbiagiot@suffolk.lib.ny.us writes:
>
> To all,
>
> This is a really small issue. I'm just wondering if anyone else has
> submitted an improvement to an existing IDL subroutine to RSI and seen it
> incorporated into a subsequent version of IDL? A while back I submitted
> (what I considered to be) a significant speed enhancement to the cross
> correlate and auto correlate functions with only minor modifications. My
> benchmarks were showing me about a 60%+ speed improvement (which is important
> if your code is constantly banging on these functions, like mine was). I had
> to convince the rep over a couple of emails what the advantage/improvement
> was.
>
I was in a similar position. I found an inconsistency in CONGRID --
which still exists today, by the way. I reported it for version 4 of
IDL, and I convinced RSI tech support people that it truly was an
inconsistency. Unfortunately it was never corrected.
Craig
P.S. My corrected version is CMCONGRID, and is available at
http://astrog.physics.wisc.edu/~craigm/idl/idl.html The operative
keyword is HALF_HALF.
--
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
Craig B. Markwardt, Ph.D. EMAIL: craigmnet@astrog.physics.wisc.edu
Astrophysics, IDL, Finance, Derivatives | Remove "net" for better response
------------------------------------------------------------ --------------
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
