Since each column may have a very different data type, the memory access stride will change when finishing one column and moving to the next, so this already impacts the hardware prefetcher. Are things made worse by the fact that each column may be allocated in very different locations of memory? Last, I have a separate 2-d array of per-cell status indicators, so this compounds the locality challenge.
The bigarray is never out of scope so shouldn't it be fine? Is it because bigarray[k] can overwrite something in the memory? It is perfectly safe in this instance, but playing with pointers can lead to segmentation faults. How do you know that whoever called this function has allocated enough memory? The salient part is construction of the vector via a pair of iterators. One word about the iterator method I posted above: I made an interesting mistake: the iterator should have been defined as a random access iterator.
My iterator implementation fails to provide this information. I should stress that this is for vectors of integers. You might get vastly different results for vectors of objects. In case I gave another impression, my point was never to argue against your recommendation, but to understand what exactly is the reason behind the slowdown and how can compilers mitigate it and if not why not.
I spend time reading them, so comparison of 2dvector and hackish 2d vector that is implemented as 1d vector would be more interesting. Consider using iterators to access the vector elements rather than using operator[], which needs to calculate the memory offset based on the position and the size of each element. This alternative should simply add sizeof T in this case sizeof int to the pointer.
It means we only need one addition, instead of both an addition and a multiplication. For one thing, a multiplication by sizeof T is a multiplication by a power of 2, which the compiler can implement as a mere shift.
The element is constructed in-place, i. The constructor of the element is called with exactly the same arguments that are supplied to the function. Feel free to download it for profiling vector performance on your system. The code snippets in the post will reflect just one iteration to keep things simple. They are defined below.
Programmers like vectors because they can just add items to the container without having to worry about the size of the container ahead of time.
However, just starting with a vector of capacity 0 and adding to it as elements come in can cost you quite a lot of runtime performance. If you know ahead of time, how big your vector can get, it is worth reserving the size ahead of time. The case where the size is not reserved ahead of time takes micro seconds us on my computer while reserving ahead of time takes only us. This realloc-like operation has four parts:. In most implementations, vector and string capacities grow by a factor of between 1.
Destroy the objects in the old memory. Deallocate the old memory. Given all that allocation, deallocation, copying, and destruction, it should not stun you to learn that these steps can be expensive. That means that the simple act of inserting an element into a vector or string may also require updating other data structures that use iterators, pointers, or references into the vector or string being expanded.
Contrary to popular belief, removing the elements from a vector via the erase or clear methods does not release the memory allocated by the vector. If that isn't what you had in mind, then no, there's no way. Simply because the element in the first position is accessed using the index 0.
A std:: vector can never be faster than an array , as it has a pointer to the first element of an array as one of its data members. But the difference in run-time speed is slim and absent in any non-trivial program. Vector is better for frequent insertion and deletion whereas Arrays are much better suited for frequent access of elements scenario. Vector occupies much more memory in exchange for the ability to manage storage and grow dynamically whereas Arrays are memory efficient data structure.
They use contiguous storage locations for their elements, which means that their elements can also be accessed using offsets on regular pointers to its elements, and just as efficiently as in arrays. In deep learning, everything are vectorized, or so called thought vector or word vector , and then the complex geometry transformation are conducted on the vectors. In Lucene's JAVA Doc, term vector is defined as "A term vector is a list of the document's terms and their number of occurrences in that document.
Initialize a vector by filling similar copy of an element For that vector provides an overloaded constructor i. It accepts the size of vector and an element as an argument. Then it initializes the vector with n elements of value val. An array is a variable that can store multiple values.
For example , if you want to store integers, you can create an array for it. We can think of a vector as a list that has one dimension. Python Javascript Linux Cheat sheet Contact. Now the std::vector vs. Preamble for micro-optimizer people Remember: "Programmers waste enormous amounts of time thinking about, or worrying about, the speed of noncritical parts of their programs, and these attempts at efficiency actually have a strong negative impact when debugging and maintenance are considered.
Thanks to metamorphosis for the full quote Don't use a C array instead of a vector or whatever just because you believe it's faster as it is supposed to be lower-level. This said, we can go back to the original question.
So use a std::vector.
0コメント