Re^2: Performance problem with Clone Method

Dave:

I made the change from the nested maps to a single map and it made a considerable improvement, thank you very much. I've never used the benchmark package, but I think I will start using it as well, its output looks more useful to me than SmallProf's.

Comment on Re^2: Performance problem with Clone Method

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Performance problem with Clone Method by davido (Cardinal) on Jul 26, 2011 at 23:33 UTC
Glad it helped. By the way, there's a module in the core distribution, Clone, which provides increased flexibility (it can handle datastructures of arbitrary shape) with its `clone()` function. However, it is actually considerably slower than even your first method. It's an example of where the increased abstraction that makes it a more useful tool all around also carries with it a performance impact. diotalevi has (or had perhaps) a module on CPAN, Clone::Fast, but when I went to install it with `cpan Clone::Fast`, the cpan utility couldn't find it. I would like to have tried benchmarking it. Another aside: Storable (also in the core distribution) offers `dclone()`, but according to the Clone documentation it's even slower, while being even more flexible. Dave	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Performance problem with Clone Method by Commandosupremo (Novice) on Jul 26, 2011 at 23:38 UTC
I will be sure to give those modules a look over, I don't think they will help me much now (as I am only cloning the matrices), but they may in the future.	[reply]