Compiling may be able to lose this flexibility in return for speed. Mathematica allows for very general forms of input. ![]() For example, it may have to allow for delaying evaluation of parts of the expression according to the user's input to the function. The chunk of machine code is stored with a name and doesn't have to be reinterpreted every time it is encountered.Īnother aspect of trying to foretell the future is that Mathematica does not know ahead of time how much flexibility is needed. A compiler, turns a whole section of high-level code into the most efficient possible machine code and remembers it. When the sequence is encountered again it has to go through the same time-consuming process of converting to machine code. The problem is that an interpreted language doesn't know if you're going to use a particular sequence of functions again so it throws away the machine code after using it. Without this happening the machine doesn't know what to do. ![]() All code gets compiled (converted) into machine code. ![]() Having a bunch of Mathematica functions followed by one another become Own functions? If compilation is used for internal functions, why does Given its power, why does Mathematica not try to compile code in its Insight to this rather than what I know, which is, because Wolfram
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |