Re: LW compiler optimizations

The attached chart shows bytes allocated vs FFT length (N) for several 
values of N. There are three curves. The blue curve is the result of 
correct optimization. The others, nearly identical, are the results for 
different methods of getting the W value for the butterfly (prior to 
optimization).

I was not interested in any cpu time difference, if any, here. 
Eliminating the source of allocation can only improve that.

Paul


On 1/13/2025 2:25 AM, Yuri Davidovsky wrote:
>
>> On 12 Jan 2025, at 20:24, Paul Werkowski (as pw at snoopy dot qozzy dot com) <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I am embarrassed to say it was an error of omission of an important type declaration, among several others there, that was responsible for allocating 280 bytes per call where it should have been zero. Apparently, at least for me, it is hard to find that which is not there.
> So how much performance increase did you see from this change?