Slightly improved run time of vnf_tri_array() #1770
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Removed one instance of flatten() in vnf_tri_array(), which avoids increasing depth of end cap face arrays just to have flatten() remove it again, and adding
eachto the recursive triangulation call.Run time of a test before ranged from 8.35 to 8.57.
Run time after ranged from 8.2 to 8.35.
Tests were performed without rendering or preview. Previewing with vnf_polyhedron() added a couple more seconds to the run time.
Improvement only about 1%, which would make vnf_tri_array() still about 9% slower than the original version that enforced a length difference between rows. I expect the slowdown is due to recursion overhead.