Re: Octave compared to Matlab

[John W. Eaton]

On 14-Aug-1998, Mario Storti <address@hidden> wrote:

| > octave> ignore_function_time_stamp="all";
| > octave> tic; for k=1:n;   c(k,:)=cross(a(k,:),b(k,:)); endfor; toc
| > ans = 21
| > octave> ignore_function_time_stamp="system";
| > octave> tic; for k=1:n;   c(k,:)=cross(a(k,:),b(k,:)); endfor; toc
| > ans = 21
| 
| BTW, apparently, time stamp checking is not too much comsuming in this
| case.

With Octave 2.0.13 (which you say you are using) the time stamps on .m
files should only be checked at most once between the printing of a
prompt, so I would expect similar results in both cases.

You may also be able to get more accurate CPU time results if you use
the cputime function instead of tic and toc.  The cputime function
measures CPU time used by Octave but tic and toc measure wall-clock
time, which can be much different than the CPU time even on a
moderately loaded system.

jwe