Closed Tortar closed 1 month ago
But I understand that this was actually copy-pasted from the ReadMe of DynamicSumTypes, indeed in a previous version the other formulation was better for DynamicSumTypes, but it developed so that it is better this formulation :-)
Oh yeah, I just realized there is a difference between DynamicSumTypes
README example and others. DynamicSumTypes
now only has a small difference compared to match and baseline on v1.11.
but on v1.10 it is still way slower
This is interesting. I didn't expect there to be a big difference. I would expect Complex{Float64}
to perform better (others are using Complex{Real}
.
I've updated a few other things together in #7 the benchmark should now be updated on website. Thanks for the correction!
This is on pair with the base version on my pc. It uses the same structs as the one in the
base.jl
file making the comparison more correct.