MathGroup Archive 2009

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

More Efficient Method

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg105076] More Efficient Method
  • From: blamm64 <blamm64 at>
  • Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 06:38:17 -0500 (EST)

I have a couple of functions designed to poke a single hole, and to
poke multiple holes, in a one-level list:

We define a function which, given the imported pressure data, finds
the subset of that pressure data excluding the pressure data points
between "targetL " and "targetU".

In[5]:= findsubset[data_?VectorQ,targetL_?NumericQ,targetU_?
NumericQ] := Select[data,(#<=targetL || #>=targetU &)]

This function will pluck out multiple holes in the data list.

In[6]:= subsets[data_?VectorQ,tarList_?ListQ]:=Module[{tmp,tmp1},

The following works fine (big holes chosen not to give large result):

In[7]:= datalist=Range[11,3411,10];

In[12]:= targetlist={{40, 1500},{1600,3300}};

In[13]:= resultdata=subsets[datalist,targetlist]


But if "datalist" happens to be very large, surely there is a (much)
more efficient method?

I tried unsuccessfully to use pure functions with Select, but have a
somewhat nebulous feeling there's a pure function way of doing this
effectively much more efficiently.

I know, I know: the above have no consistency checking.  I also know
"subsets" could be used in place of "findsubset" just by replacing the
call of "findsubset" with the code of "findsubset" in "subsets".

>From what I've seen on this forum there are some really experienced
people who might provide an efficient way of implementing the above.

-Brian L.

  • Prev by Date: Re: Re: Permanent Computation Efficiency
  • Next by Date: Re: Define a function as a graphics directive?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Mathematica 7.0 - Wrong Documentation on StudentTCI
  • Next by thread: Re: More Efficient Method