diff --git a/dev/.documenter-siteinfo.json b/dev/.documenter-siteinfo.json index c1d02c0..49c468f 100644 --- a/dev/.documenter-siteinfo.json +++ b/dev/.documenter-siteinfo.json @@ -1 +1 @@ -{"documenter":{"julia_version":"1.11.1","generation_timestamp":"2024-10-16T21:45:27","documenter_version":"1.4.1"}} \ No newline at end of file +{"documenter":{"julia_version":"1.11.1","generation_timestamp":"2024-10-20T18:11:07","documenter_version":"1.4.1"}} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/dev/compare/index.html b/dev/compare/index.html index ed05891..35b605f 100644 --- a/dev/compare/index.html +++ b/dev/compare/index.html @@ -567,4 +567,4 @@ 2.187066 seconds (8.27 k allocations: 76.855 MiB, 0.36% compilation time) julia> @time itp(xq, yq; method = Hiyoshi(2)); - 13.762652 seconds (9.26 k allocations: 76.920 MiB, 0.06% compilation time)
Overall, the smooth interpolants have the best performance, with Farin(1)
and Hiyoshi(2)
typically beating most interpolants. Hiyoshi(2)
is much slower than the other interpolants, though, and Farin(1)
may be a preferable interpolant if $C^1$ continuity at the data sites is sufficient. For generating derivatives, the Direct()
seems to beat the results with the Iterative()
method in most situations.
Settings
This document was generated with Documenter.jl version 1.4.1 on Wednesday 16 October 2024. Using Julia version 1.11.1.