[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Need some help with Oct files
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: Need some help with Oct files |
Date: |
Tue, 5 Sep 2006 11:41:51 -0400 |
On 5-Sep-2006, Michael Creel wrote:
| That's interesting. Of course, samin.cc makes the declaration in the
| part that is omitted - I pointed Philip to a specific file so he can
| get a working example.
OK. In any case, there is no need to write
return octave_value_list(f_return);
if f_return is already an octave_value_list object since
return f_return;
will work just as well and avoid an extra copy of the
octave_value_list object.
| But I hadn't thought of the ordering affecting
| the number of resizings. Would the reverse order be expected to have a
| noticeable effect on the time it takes the function to evaluate?
The time would probably not be significant for just a few values, but
why force the extra resizes if there is no need to?
| I'm
| guessing that this would only be the case if the things in the list
| used substantial memory or if it were called frequently. Is that correct?
No, because copying octave_value objects only copies a pointer and a
reference count, so the time required is independent of the size of
the object.
jwe