comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Messages from Usenet group comp.lang.idl-pvwave, compiled by Paulo Penteado

Home » Public Forums » archive » FOR loops removal
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: FOR loops removal [message #62059 is a reply to message #61975] Tue, 19 August 2008 13:14 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
David Fanning is currently offline  David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
Senior Member
Chris writes:

> IDL for loops are slow because the part of IDL
> that interprets your file a fast but crotchety old man who can't hear
> you very well and may not even really be listening. Any time you tell
> him to do something, it takes him a while to interpret what you just
> said - much longer than other, less crotchety men. Once he figures out
> what's going on, however, he's plenty fast (especially if you tell him
> to do something that he was already designed to do, for which he has
> been well optimized). Good vectorization, then, minimizes the number
> of instructions (e.g. iterations in a loop) while maximizing the
> amount of work to do with each instruction.

I think this is a transparent attempt to characterize certain
persons on this newsgroup and I deeply resent it. :-(

Cheers,

David

P.S. Let's just say I would type a smiley face, but my
feelings have been cut too close to the bone. :-)

--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Sepore ma de ni thui. ("Perhaps thou speakest truth.")
[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: Re: Loop breaks IDL
Next Topic: Where is my function called

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Sun Oct 12 12:19:36 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.04016 seconds