I wrote "replicate" but the darn e-mail program "fixed" it for me. I expected replicate to be a bit slower, but not by that amount. I just wanted to include replicate as a more readable version of lapply while still improving over the loop approach.
-- Gregory (Greg) L. Snow Ph.D. Statistical Data Center Intermountain Healthcare greg.s...@imail.org 801.408.8111 > -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Bolker [mailto:bol...@ufl.edu] > Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 10:19 AM > To: Greg Snow > Cc: r-help@r-project.org > Subject: Re: [R] Simulation > > Greg Snow wrote: > > Another possibility (maybe more readable, gives the option of a list, > probably not faster): > > > > Replicate(1000, rexp(15,1) ) > > > > I think that should be "replicate" > > The matrix form is quite a bit faster, but don't know if that will > matter -- times below are for doing this task (1000 x 15 replicates) > 1000 times ... > > > system.time(replicate(1000,replicate(1000,rexp(15,1)))) > user system elapsed > 12.689 0.220 12.985 > > system.time(replicate(1000,matrix(rexp(15000,1),ncol=15))) > user system elapsed > 2.512 0.452 2.976 > > > -- > Ben Bolker > Associate professor, Biology Dep't, Univ. of Florida > bol...@ufl.edu / www.zoology.ufl.edu/bolker > GPG key: www.zoology.ufl.edu/bolker/benbolker-publickey.asc ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
