Skip to main content

version 10 - In Compile "InlineExternalDefinitions" doesn't work anymore in Mma v10 like in v9


In Mma 9 using CompilationOptions -> {"InlineExternalDefinitions" -> True} inside of Compile inlined the values of the previously defined parameters used in the function to be compiled.


For example:


nPara = 3;
cf = Compile[{{x, _Real, 1}},
  Sum[x[[i]], {i, nPara}], 
  CompilationOptions -> {"InlineExternalDefinitions" -> True}

  ]

resultes in:


Output Mma9


and works flawless as expected.


But in Mma 10 the output is:


Output Mma10


And, as now the value of nPara is not known to the compiled function, the comiled function doesn't work anymore.


For such a simple function one can apply Whith as a workaround:


With[{nPara = nPara},

 Compile[{{x, _Real, 1}},
  Sum[x[[i]], {i, nPara}], 
  CompilationOptions -> {"InlineExternalDefinitions" -> True}
  ]
 ]

However, in bigger notebooks and with more complex functions this undocumented code break (or is a bug or a fix) causes bigger issues.


Does anyone know a more convenient or automated workaround to fix this problem?



Answer



It is unfortunate that this no longer works. I like metaprogramming, and I felt that inlining variables is a nice exercise, so I can share some functions with you that make things easier.



Your approach using With seems reasonable. I also saw you test an example using Evaluate, but relying on the fact that x[[i]] evaluates to x[[i]] if i not an integer and x has no value is quite bad.


You say that your approach using With will not work for more complicated cases. If the issue is that you want to use evaluation to determine the values of your parameters, you can use the following.


ClearAll@inlineEval
SetAttributes[inlineEval, HoldAll];
inlineEval[expr_, symbols__] :=
 Unevaluated[expr] /. 
  Thread[Rule[HoldPattern /@ Unevaluated[{symbols}], {symbols}]]

You can use it as follows. Let's set up a situation that is relatively hard to deal with to test it.


b := c[1, 2]

c[x_, y_] := x + y

Now we can do


cfu =
  inlineEval[
   Compile[{{x, _Integer}}, Sum[1, {i, x + b}]]
   ,
   b
   ];
cfu[3]



6

If you don't want to use evaluation, you can use the following.


SetAttributes[inlineAll, HoldAll]
inlineAll[expr_, symbols__Symbol] :=
  ReleaseHold[
   HoldComplete[expr] //.
    Flatten[Function[Null, {OwnValues@#, DownValues@#}, HoldAll] /@ 

      Unevaluated[{symbols}]]
   ];

Now you can also this, but note that you have to specify that c has to be inlined as well.


cfu2 =
  inlineAll[
   Compile[{{x, _Integer}}, Sum[1, {i, x + b}]]
   ,
   b, c
   ];

cfu2[3]


6

Note that both functions also with symbols that have DownValues, which is something I believe "InlineExternalDefinitions" could not deal with to begin with. The previous examples dealt only with constants, but here is an example where we inline a function.


f[x_] := Norm[x];
cfu3 =
  inlineAll[
   Compile[{{x, _Real, 1}}, f[x] + 3]

   ,
   f
   ];
cfu3[{1., 1.}] == Sqrt[2] + 3


True

This technique allows you to make large compiled functions, while maintaining readability. You could imagine that when compiled functions get too large, you simply let one compiled function call another compiled function, and optionally using "InlineCompiledFunctions". But I like this alternative :).


Related (but probably less nice than this)



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]
Post a Comment
Read more

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]
Post a Comment
Read more

plotting - Adding a thick curve to a regionplot

Suppose we have the following simple RegionPlot: f[x_] := 1 - x^2 g[x_] := 1 - 0.5 x^2 RegionPlot[{y < f[x], f[x] < y < g[x], y > g[x]}, {x, 0, 2}, {y, 0, 2}] Now I'm trying to change the curve defined by $y=g[x]$ into a thick black curve, while leaving all other boundaries in the plot unchanged. I've tried adding the region $y=g[x]$ and playing with the plotstyle, which didn't work, and I've tried BoundaryStyle, which changed all the boundaries in the plot. Now I'm kinda out of ideas... Any help would be appreciated! Answer With f[x_] := 1 - x^2 g[x_] := 1 - 0.5 x^2 You can use Epilog to add the thick line: RegionPlot[{y < f[x], f[x] < y < g[x], y > g[x]}, {x, 0, 2}, {y, 0, 2}, PlotPoints -> 50, Epilog -> (Plot[g[x], {x, 0, 2}, PlotStyle -> {Black, Thick}][[1]]), PlotStyle -> {Directive[Yellow, Opacity[0.4]], Directive[Pink, Opacity[0.4]],
Post a Comment
Read more