You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The module depends on the SkipVectors module, located in the same directory.
As far as I remember VandermondeInverse.vandermonde_inv offers a huge improvement in accuracy over using SpecialMatrices.jl, and sometimes it's significantly faster, too.
Do you want a PR? If so, do you have any suggestions regarding the code, or testing, or perhaps do you want some benchmarks?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sure it would be good to have a fast inv here for Vandermonde.
I actually don't see any inv in the current code (I haven't worked the guts of the Vandermonde case so I don't know much about the internals), so yes it would be be helpful to see a benchmark to see exactly what you are comparing. Oh, perhaps what you are calling inv is actually A\b. Consider using the standard Julia names like ldiv!
Comments on code:
for subtracter you might look at Base.Fix1
do you really need all those local statements? you need those in a REPL, but i don't think they are needed in functions.
i don't understand vandermonde_inv(x::AbstractVector{T}) - a docstring might help
Here I have a module with a short and simple implementation of a Vandermonde matrix inverse:
https://gitlab.com/nsajko/PolynomialPassingThroughIntervals.jl/-/blob/main/src/VandermondeInverse.jl
The module depends on the
SkipVectors
module, located in the same directory.As far as I remember
VandermondeInverse.vandermonde_inv
offers a huge improvement in accuracy over using SpecialMatrices.jl, and sometimes it's significantly faster, too.Do you want a PR? If so, do you have any suggestions regarding the code, or testing, or perhaps do you want some benchmarks?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: