RFC: rewrite histogram equalization routine for maximal performance #307
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
neutrinoceros
force-pushed
the
perf/fast-equalizer
branch
3 times, most recently
from
9507b8a to
986eb10
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
(I see no actual performance change with this change, even with artificially large bin counts) |
neutrinoceros
force-pushed
the
perf/fast-equalizer
branch
from
986eb10 to
cb54efd
Compare
neutrinoceros
force-pushed
the
perf/fast-equalizer
branch
from
cb54efd to
ad16ce3
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
I think I would actually prefer we keep using |
Collaborator
Author
|
I went down a different route: I'm working on re-implementing histogram equalization in rust. Currently, the work in ongoing within rlic, but I may end up spinning an entirely new package. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This in itself isn't a sufficient reason to make
interpna hard requirement but it seems worth considering if we're going to go with #305 any way.