Timeline for How can I define a very large matrix efficiently?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 9:23 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Jul 3, 2019 at 3:30 | comment | added | Michael E2 |
@Allure Yeah, consider Names["System`*"] // Length, over 6000 commands, plus many useful undocumented ones.
|
|
| Jul 3, 2019 at 2:17 | comment | added | Allure | My goodness, Mathematica is complicated. Not hating on your answer but ... wow. So many commands! | |
| Jul 2, 2019 at 19:12 | comment | added | MikeY | @MichaelE2, I tweaked my answer, thanks for the tip. | |
| Jul 2, 2019 at 18:14 | comment | added | Michael E2 |
@MikeY You could also use ones = ConstantArray[1, {1, n}] instead of ToPackedArray.
|
|
| Jul 2, 2019 at 18:11 | history | edited | Michael E2 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 9 characters in body
|
| Jul 2, 2019 at 18:06 | comment | added | Michael E2 | @RohitNamjoshi Thanks for pointing out the error. | |
| Jul 2, 2019 at 18:05 | history | edited | Michael E2 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Fixed typo
|
| Jul 2, 2019 at 17:50 | comment | added | Rohit Namjoshi | Thanks Michael. I think you meant "can be improved by using Array". | |
| Jul 2, 2019 at 17:41 | comment | added | MikeY | Nice comparison, thanks. I chose my approach more for ease of understanding, or maybe to align with the underlying logic of the matrix, rather than performance. Nice to see it did alright on the performance front too. I learned something! | |
| Jul 2, 2019 at 17:34 | history | answered | Michael E2 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |