Path: news.mathworks.com!not-for-mail
From: <HIDDEN>
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.matlab
Subject: Re: avoiding loops to built a z matrix of the most efficient form
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:18:01 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: The MathWorks, Inc.
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <gqdsgp$aic$1@fred.mathworks.com>
References: <gqdj93$qa4$1@fred.mathworks.com> <gqdn0i$a5r$1@fred.mathworks.com> <gqdr01$jp4$1@fred.mathworks.com>
Reply-To: <HIDDEN>
NNTP-Posting-Host: webapp-02-blr.mathworks.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: fred.mathworks.com 1238005081 10828 172.30.248.37 (25 Mar 2009 18:18:01 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@mathworks.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 18:18:01 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: MATLAB Central Newsreader 1187260
Xref: news.mathworks.com comp.soft-sys.matlab:527694

"Jose " <jose.l.vega@gmail.com> wrote in message <gqdr01$jp4$1@fred.mathworks.com>...
> ......
> Then, the conclusion up to the moment is that using "rematting" and "reshapping" is the faster way to do it as Roger suggest when we consider big number of data v1 and parameters v2.
> ......

  I don't think you have made a fair comparison here, Jose.  The question asked here in this thread and answered by Urs and Bruno is different, though related, from the one I have answered in the other thread "Built a matrix z(3x2) avoiding loops".  The latter thread involved the 'inversa' matrix and this thread didn't.  You are comparing "apples and oranges" here.

Roger Stafford