You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
For each put() call, though, MARBL will do a linear search through marbl_instance%parameters%vars(:) and look for the index that corresponds to [varname], which is O(N). Restructuring marbl_config_and_parms_type would allow us to speed this up significantly; @klindsay28 has mentioned using a binary tree or a hash as two possibilities.
I believe this can be done without affecting the MARBL interface at all, so I don't think it is necessary for MARBL 1.0.0... but I do want to keep it in mind.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think it should be noted somewhere -- without running CISO, MARBL has 157 variables that can be set during config and 416 that can be set during init. Turning CISO on increases those to 170 and 546, respectively.
As of 6ba527f (on the enhancements/initialization branch of my fork of MARBL), I added the ability for the GCM to call
For each
put()
call, though, MARBL will do a linear search throughmarbl_instance%parameters%vars(:)
and look for the index that corresponds to[varname]
, which isO(N)
. Restructuringmarbl_config_and_parms_type
would allow us to speed this up significantly; @klindsay28 has mentioned using a binary tree or a hash as two possibilities.I believe this can be done without affecting the MARBL interface at all, so I don't think it is necessary for MARBL 1.0.0... but I do want to keep it in mind.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: