On 08/08/2007, mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for the ideas to circumvent vectorization.
> But the real function I need to vectorize is quite a bit more
> complicated.
> So I would really like to use vectorize.
> Are there any reasons against vectorization? Is it slow?
> The way Tim sugge
Thanks for the ideas to circumvent vectorization.
But the real function I need to vectorize is quite a bit more
complicated.
So I would really like to use vectorize.
Are there any reasons against vectorization? Is it slow?
The way Tim suggests I expect to be slow as there are two functions
calls.
T
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 08:54:18AM -0700, Timothy Hochberg wrote:
> Don't use vectorize? Something like:
>
> def f(self,y):
> return np.where(y > self.x, y, self.x)
A one-liner, cool. Benchmarks on some other methods:
Method 1: N.where
100 loops, best of 3: 9.32 ms per loop
Method 2: N.cl
On 8/8/07, mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am trying to figure out a way to define a vectorized function inside
> a class.
> This is what I tried:
>
> class test:
> def __init__(self):
> self.x = 3.0
> def func(self,y):
> rv = self.x
>
Hi Mark
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 03:37:09PM -, mark wrote:
> I am trying to figure out a way to define a vectorized function inside
> a class.
> This is what I tried:
>
> class test:
> def __init__(self):
> self.x = 3.0
> def func(self,y):
> rv = self.x
I am trying to figure out a way to define a vectorized function inside
a class.
This is what I tried:
class test:
def __init__(self):
self.x = 3.0
def func(self,y):
rv = self.x
if y > self.x: rv = y
return rv
f
