Re: [Caml-list] OCaml Speed for Block Convolutions

["David McClain" <dmcclain1@mindspring.com>]

> I can easily imagine that, with two caveats: tuples passed directly to
> functions do seem to get elided, while on the other hand apparently
> atomic float accumulators can cause more garbage than you might think.

Actually, wherever I produce new data, I usually allocate an entirely new
array to hold the results. Then I use unsafe accesses like the following for
summing two arrays:

let dst = Array.unsafe_create nel in
for ix = 0 to pred nel do
    Array.unsafe_set dst ix ((Array.unsafe_get src1 ix) +. (Array.unsafe_get
src2 ix))
done;

I think the constant creation of new arrays to hold intermediate results
(i.e., immutable data) is costing too much. Many of the intermediate values
could be overwritten in place and save a lot of time.

... of course... don't ask how long it took to write all this stuff in the
inner loops of the convolution in C, nor how long it took to debug that
stuff.... And immutable data definitely helps to get the code correct. OCaml
still rules!

- DM

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr.  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr