[Numpy-discussion] Iterative Matrix Multiplication

Ian Mallett geometrian@gmail....
Sat Mar 6 14:08:23 CST 2010

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Friedrich Romstedt <
friedrichromstedt@gmail.com> wrote:

> At the moment, I can do nothing about that.  Seems that we have
> reached the limit.  Anyhow, is it now faster than your Python list
> implementation, and if yes, how much?  How large was your gain by
> using numpy means at all?  I'm just curious.
Unfortunately, the pure Python implementation is actually an order of
magnitude faster.  The fastest solution right now is to use numpy for the
transformations, then convert it back into a list (.tolist()) and use Python
for the rest.

Here's the actual Python code.

def glLibInternal_edges(object,lightpos):
    edge_set = set([])
    edges = {}
    for sublist in xrange(object.number_of_lists): #There's only one sublist
        face_data = object.light_volume_face_data[sublist]
        for indices in face_data: #v1,v2,v3,n
            normal = object.transformed_normals[sublist][indices[3]]
            v1,v2,v3 = [ object.transformed_vertices[sublist][indices[i]]
for i in xrange(3) ]
                for p1,p2 in [[indices[0],indices[1]],
                    edge = [p1,p2]
                    index = 0
                    edge2 = list(edge)
                    edge2 = tuple(edge2)
                    if edge2 in edges: edges[edge2][1] += 1
                    else:              edges[edge2] = [edge,1]
    edges2 = []
    for edge_data in edges.values():
        if edge_data[1] == 1:
            p1 = object.transformed_vertices[sublist][edge_data[0][0]]
            p2 = object.transformed_vertices[sublist][edge_data[0][1]]
    return edges2

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20100306/c8546cad/attachment-0001.html 

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list