> On 31 Jan 2016, at 9:48 am, Sebastian Berg wrote:
>
> On Sa, 2016-01-30 at 20:27 +0100, Derek Homeier wrote:
>> On 27 Jan 2016, at 1:10 pm, Sebastian Berg <
>> sebast...@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mi, 2016-01-27 at 11:19 +, Nadav Horesh wrote:
Why the dot function/method is
On Sa, 2016-01-30 at 20:27 +0100, Derek Homeier wrote:
> On 27 Jan 2016, at 1:10 pm, Sebastian Berg <
> sebast...@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Mi, 2016-01-27 at 11:19 +, Nadav Horesh wrote:
> > > Why the dot function/method is slower than @ on python 3.5.1?
> > > Tested
> > > from the l
On 27 Jan 2016, at 1:10 pm, Sebastian Berg wrote:
>
> On Mi, 2016-01-27 at 11:19 +, Nadav Horesh wrote:
>> Why the dot function/method is slower than @ on python 3.5.1? Tested
>> from the latest 1.11 maintenance branch.
>>
>
> The explanation I think is that you do not have a blas optimizat
On Mi, 2016-01-27 at 11:19 +, Nadav Horesh wrote:
> Why the dot function/method is slower than @ on python 3.5.1? Tested
> from the latest 1.11 maintenance branch.
>
The explanation I think is that you do not have a blas optimization. In
which case the fallback mode is probably faster in the
Why the dot function/method is slower than @ on python 3.5.1? Tested from the
latest 1.11 maintenance branch.
np.__version__
Out[39]: '1.11.0.dev0+Unknown'
%timeit A @ c
1 loops, best of 3: 185 µs per loop
%timeit A.dot(c)
1000 loops, best of 3: 526 µs per loop
%timeit np.dot(A,c)
100
