Timeline for Instruct a Table to only evaluate until a condition is fulfilled
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
May 2, 2013 at 23:02 | history | edited | Michael E2 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed formatting
|
May 2, 2013 at 13:41 | history | edited | Michael E2 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added solution
|
May 2, 2013 at 13:33 | comment | added | Michael E2 | In this simple example, I don't think much changes if the list is increased by diminishing the step size. The other parameters, the functions and the resulting range to be iterated over, will determine which approach is best in a particular case. | |
May 2, 2013 at 12:52 | comment | added | jVincent | In the general case you are not guaranteed that you can perform your limit test globally, and you are left in the situation that calculating the range of elements you would want to iterate is effectively the same as iterating them. Though for the model case given this is naturally not the situation. As for this case, I think the results will depend greatly on how large you make your table, and you didn't really make it all that large. | |
May 2, 2013 at 12:38 | comment | added | J. M.'s missing motivation♦ |
Yes, whenever feasible, it is better to just manually reckon out where your Table[] is supposed to stop under your set conditions. Of course, that requires thought, and not many people seem to like doing that... in the case of generating the entire table and then just cherry-picking what is wanted, I would say this is again one of the tough choices of "speed or storage".
|
|
May 2, 2013 at 12:32 | history | answered | Michael E2 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |