Timeline for Ellipse-detection algorithm
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 1, 2017 at 12:26 | comment | added | Gykonik |
I have profiled math.pow() and pow2() in a range of (0, 9999999) with the result, that first one needed ~5,5s and second one needed ~2,5s. So this question is solved! :P
|
|
| Feb 1, 2017 at 12:13 | comment | added | Heslacher | @Gykonik not quite sure if this is still valid, but you can check for yourself: stackoverflow.com/a/5246964/2655508 | |
| Feb 1, 2017 at 12:05 | comment | added | Gykonik |
When I think about it again I'm not quiet shure, if math.pow()wouldn't be faster then pow2()because I think, that first one is very optimized and maybe also caches some calculations...
|
|
| Jan 31, 2017 at 14:56 | comment | added | Peter Taylor |
Actually, correction, it's buggy. Should use k instead of i.
|
|
| Jan 31, 2017 at 14:48 | comment | added | Peter Taylor |
Actually, tmp2 just seems to be tmp, so the calculation is unconditionally superfluous.
|
|
| Jan 31, 2017 at 13:14 | history | answered | Heslacher | CC BY-SA 3.0 |