loop vs memset to initialize array.. different results?

[silversurfer2025]

Hello everybdy,
I am a little confused for the following reason:

In my code I used a simple for-loop in order to initialize a 2D-array
of floats to zero. Because of efficiency reasons, I changed it to use
memset and I get totally different results.. How can this be?

Here is the example:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize];

memset(gaborfil ter, 0, sizeof(float) * filtersize * filtersize);

OR

for(int i = 0; i < filtersize;i++) {
for(int j = 0; j < filtersize;j++) {
gaborfilter[i][j] = 0;
}
}

Later calculations give totally different results using these two
methods. Is there something really obviously different, which I am
currently missing?

Thanks a lot
Tim

[Victor Bazarov]

silversurfer202 5 wrote:

Hello everybdy,
I am a little confused for the following reason:

In my code I used a simple for-loop in order to initialize a 2D-array
of floats to zero. Because of efficiency reasons, I changed it to use
memset and I get totally different results.. How can this be?

Here is the example:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize];

memset(gaborfil ter, 0, sizeof(float) * filtersize * filtersize);

OR

for(int i = 0; i < filtersize;i++) {
for(int j = 0; j < filtersize;j++) {
gaborfilter[i][j] = 0;
}
}

Later calculations give totally different results using these two
methods. Is there something really obviously different, which I am
currently missing?

A "zero" in a floating point variable is not necessarily the same as
"all bits zero". 'memset' clears all bits. Assigning 0 to the elements
of the array does THE RIGHT THING(tm). Have you thought about simply
initialising the array or do you need to periodically clear it?

float blah[one][two] = {}; // sets all elements to 0

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[Mike Wahler]

"silversurfer20 25" <ki****@web.dew rote in message
news:11******** **************@ 75g2000cwc.goog legroups.com...

Hello everybdy,
I am a little confused for the following reason:

In my code I used a simple for-loop in order to initialize a 2D-array
of floats to zero. Because of efficiency reasons,

Have you proven with timing or profiling that there
is indeed an efficiency problem?

I changed it to use
memset

Don't.

and I get totally different results.. How can this be?

Because the representation of 0.0 isn't necessarily
all-bits-zero.

>
Here is the example:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize];

memset(gaborfil ter, 0, sizeof(float) * filtersize * filtersize);

This is only guaranteed to work with unsigned integer types
(e.g. 'unsigned int', 'unsigned char'.

OR

for(int i = 0; i < filtersize;i++) {
for(int j = 0; j < filtersize;j++) {
gaborfilter[i][j] = 0;

This is the only portable way to assign values to
each element of the array of type 'float' objects.
But if you want all values to be zero, you could simply
initialize the array when you create it:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize] = {0};
/* (all elements now have value of zero) */

}
}

Later calculations give totally different results using these two
methods. Is there something really obviously different, which I am
currently missing?

See above.

Also, you should use type 'double' rather than 'float'.
There's even a possibility that type 'double' could be
more 'efficient' (but this ultimately depends upon your
platforrm).

And finally, this is C++, so imo you should be using
containers rather than arrays.

std::vector<flo at>(filtersize, std::vector<flo at>(filtersize) );

/* All elements now have values of zero. */

-Mike

[silversurfer2025]

Mike Wahler schrieb:

"silversurfer20 25" <ki****@web.dew rote in message
news:11******** **************@ 75g2000cwc.goog legroups.com...

Hello everybdy,
I am a little confused for the following reason:

In my code I used a simple for-loop in order to initialize a 2D-array
of floats to zero. Because of efficiency reasons,

Have you proven with timing or profiling that there
is indeed an efficiency problem?

I changed it to use
memset

Don't.

OK ;)

>

and I get totally different results.. How can this be?

Because the representation of 0.0 isn't necessarily
all-bits-zero.

Here is the example:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize];

memset(gaborfil ter, 0, sizeof(float) * filtersize * filtersize);

This is only guaranteed to work with unsigned integer types
(e.g. 'unsigned int', 'unsigned char'.

Ah, ok.. wat a pitty... I thought that I could get my code to work
faster..

>

OR

for(int i = 0; i < filtersize;i++) {
for(int j = 0; j < filtersize;j++) {
gaborfilter[i][j] = 0;

This is the only portable way to assign values to
each element of the array of type 'float' objects.
But if you want all values to be zero, you could simply
initialize the array when you create it:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize] = {0};

I tried this one before, but I get the compiler error:
error: variable-sized object 'gaborfilter' may not be
initialized
Anything I can do about it?

/* (all elements now have value of zero) */

}
}

Later calculations give totally different results using these two
methods. Is there something really obviously different, which I am
currently missing?

See above.

Also, you should use type 'double' rather than 'float'.
There's even a possibility that type 'double' could be
more 'efficient' (but this ultimately depends upon your
platforrm).

I'll change it right away, I thought that float would be better for
memory-reasons..

>
And finally, this is C++, so imo you should be using
containers rather than arrays.

I am only using them for calculations, the results are later put into a
vector. (please do not ask!)

>
std::vector<flo at>(filtersize, std::vector<flo at>(filtersize) );

/* All elements now have values of zero. */

-Mike

Tim

[Victor Bazarov]

silversurfer202 5 wrote:

>[..]
But if you want all values to be zero, you could simply
initialize the array when you create it:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize] = {0};

I tried this one before, but I get the compiler error:
error: variable-sized object 'gaborfilter' may not be
initialized
Anything I can do about it?

Variable-sized object? Are you using g++ extensions? You might want
to consider a dynamic array then...

[..]

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[Mike Wahler]

"silversurfer20 25" <ki****@web.dew rote in message
news:11******** **************@ p79g2000cwp.goo glegroups.com.. .

>
Mike Wahler schrieb:

>"silversurfer2 025" <ki****@web.dew rote in message
news:11******* *************** @75g2000cwc.goo glegroups.com.. .

Hello everybdy,
I am a little confused for the following reason:

In my code I used a simple for-loop in order to initialize a 2D-array
of floats to zero. Because of efficiency reasons,

Have you proven with timing or profiling that there
is indeed an efficiency problem?

I changed it to use
memset

Don't.

OK ;)

>>

and I get totally different results.. How can this be?

Because the representation of 0.0 isn't necessarily
all-bits-zero.

>
Here is the example:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize];

memset(gaborfil ter, 0, sizeof(float) * filtersize * filtersize);

This is only guaranteed to work with unsigned integer types
(e.g. 'unsigned int', 'unsigned char'.

Ah, ok.. wat a pitty... I thought that I could get my code to work
faster..

Have you proven that it's not fast enough?

>

>>

OR

for(int i = 0; i < filtersize;i++) {
for(int j = 0; j < filtersize;j++) {
gaborfilter[i][j] = 0;

This is the only portable way to assign values to
each element of the array of type 'float' objects.
But if you want all values to be zero, you could simply
initialize the array when you create it:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize] = {0};

I tried this one before, but I get the compiler error:
error: variable-sized object 'gaborfilter' may not be
initialized
Anything I can do about it?

Yes. Don't use non-const expressions to specify array
dimensions. They're not allowed in C++. Either use
a literal constant, a const-qualified object, or a macro:

float gaborfilter[10][10];

or

const size_t filtersize(10);
float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize];

or

#define filtersize 10

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize];

But as I've pointed out already, a container (e.g.
vector) would be better.

>

>/* (all elements now have value of zero) */

}
}

Later calculations give totally different results using these two
methods. Is there something really obviously different, which I am
currently missing?

See above.

Also, you should use type 'double' rather than 'float'.
There's even a possibility that type 'double' could be
more 'efficient' (but this ultimately depends upon your
platforrm).

I'll change it right away, I thought that float would be better for
memory-reasons..

Stop guessing. :-) Prove there's a problem before trying to solve it.

-Mike

[silversurfer2025]

Victor Bazarov schrieb:

silversurfer202 5 wrote:

[..]
But if you want all values to be zero, you could simply
initialize the array when you create it:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize] = {0};

I tried this one before, but I get the compiler error:
error: variable-sized object 'gaborfilter' may not be
initialized
Anything I can do about it?

Variable-sized object? Are you using g++ extensions? You might want
to consider a dynamic array then...

Hm.. I do not even know what these extensions are. I do compile with
g++ but the declaration I gave above is all I wrote. I guess it says
dynamic because there is a variable (filtersize) giving the length of
the array which should be created?

Thanks once more
Tim

>

[..]

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[Andrey Tarasevich]

Mike Wahler wrote:

>Here is the example:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize];

memset(gaborfi lter, 0, sizeof(float) * filtersize * filtersize);

This is only guaranteed to work with unsigned integer types
(e.g. 'unsigned int', 'unsigned char'.
...

Strictly speaking, this is only guaranteed to work with 'char' types (signed and
unsigned). It is not guaranteed to work with larger integral types because it
might set their padding bits (if any) incorrectly.

There's a C99 proposal to require it to work with all integral types (I don't
know its current status).

--
Best regards,
Andrey Tarasevich

[Pete Becker]

Andrey Tarasevich wrote:

>
Strictly speaking, this is only guaranteed to work with 'char' types (signed and
unsigned). It is not guaranteed to work with larger integral types because it
might set their padding bits (if any) incorrectly.

To underscore the "strictly speaking" portion: this works just fine with
every floating-point implementation I've used. The problem is
undoubtedly somewhere else, despite the apparent certainty expressed in
most of the answers.

[Howard]

"silversurfer20 25" <ki****@web.dew rote in message
news:11******** **************@ 75g2000cwc.goog legroups.com...

Hello everybdy,
I am a little confused for the following reason:

In my code I used a simple for-loop in order to initialize a 2D-array
of floats to zero. Because of efficiency reasons, I changed it to use
memset and I get totally different results.. How can this be?

Here is the example:

float gaborfilter[filtersize][filtersize];

memset(gaborfil ter, 0, sizeof(float) * filtersize * filtersize);

OR

for(int i = 0; i < filtersize;i++) {
for(int j = 0; j < filtersize;j++) {
gaborfilter[i][j] = 0;
}
}

Later calculations give totally different results using these two
methods. Is there something really obviously different, which I am
currently missing?

What differs in the results? And how do you know (for sure) that it's
related to the initialization above and not some other code that's run
later?

-Howard