mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 19:25): mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 19:25):I'm writing an infinite, random iterator. Something like this (simplified):
struct RandIter
x :: Vector{Int}
end
Base.length(ri :: RandIter) = 5
function Base.iterate(i::RandIter, state = 0)
if state < 5
i.x[1] = rand((1,2,3))
i.x[2] = rand((1,2,3))
i.x[3] = rand((1,2,3))
state += 1
return (i.x, state)
else
return nothing
end
end
and then
julia> ri = RandIter([0,0,0]);
julia> collect(Iterators.take(ri, 4))
4-element Vector{Any}:
[1, 3, 2]
[1, 3, 2]
[1, 3, 2]
[1, 3, 2]
Here, [1, 3, 2] is the last random value assigned to ri.x.
This is specific to take; for example, this works:
julia> for v in ri println(v); end
[3, 3, 1]
[2, 3, 1]
[3, 3, 3]
[1, 2, 2]
[1, 1, 2]
Ultimately, what I want to do is generate the random values without allocating; that's the idea behind reusing the memory allocated in ri.x. How can I do that and still have a working take iterator?
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:26):you're returning the exact same array in every iteration
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:26):if you want to create distinct arrays, you HAVE to copy
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:27):Hmm, I'm starting to think that this will be impossible... for take to work, at some point a copy will have to be made. Unfortunately, this makes the iterator almost 10x slower
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:27):you could always return a tuple instead, if the size is limited
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:27):but yeah, at some point you will have to copy
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:28):the only reason println works is because it prints the current state of the array, and doesn't keep a reference to it around for longer than one iteration
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:28):Yep -- the problem with tuples is that later on I'd like to use the random values in more flexible ways.
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:29):I guess what I was hoping would happen is that collect(take(...)) would allocate an array of the required size and stick the iterator values in there, requiring only one allocation.
If I need to copy the array, I end up doing one allocation per iteration, which is sad.
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:30):well it does only allocate once, the outer array
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:30):it's just that every entry returned is the exact same array (===), where you just changed its contents
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:31):it's the same reason why
julia> fill([], 2)
2-element Vector{Vector{Any}}:
[]
[]
julia> ans[1] === ans[2]
true
Yeah, but collect is not copying the values returned by my iterator.
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:32):why should it?
Michael Abbott (Dec 22 2022 at 20:32):If you do something with the result, though, it might be fine that it gets re-used. E.g. map(sum, iter) ought to call sum before getting the next element, and thus have distinct values.
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:33):@Michael Abbott Yeah, in some cases (like for) above it does work.
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:33):if you want to copy, you need to copy explicitly - either by doing Iterators.map(copy, RandIter([1,2,3])) or by copying in your iterator
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:33):mbaz said:
Michael Abbott Yeah, in some cases (like
for) above it does work.
again - the for doesn't copy. The println just looks at the elements of the array before you change them again.
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:34):I understand.
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:35):I'm not complaining, by the way, I just was very confused by the behavior of collect(take(itr)). I assumed that, just like println uses the values before they change, collect would take the returned values and stick them in its own array.
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:36):that is exactly what it's doing though! :D
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:36):you just always return the same array
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:36):so it always sticks the same exact array into the new location
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:38):Maybe I don't know what you mean by "same array". I understand the array (in the sense of the array pointer) is the same. However, the values of the array are different in each iteration.
Michael Abbott (Dec 22 2022 at 20:38):Maybe this is like copy vs deepcopy. collect is making a new array to hold things, but those things themselves are just pointers to memory. If I do A = [[1,2], [3,4]]; B = copy(A), doing B[1] = [5,6] mutates B but not A. But B[2] .= 0 mutates not B but B[2], which is === A[2], the same memory.
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:40):By "same array" I mean that they are === (called egal) - they are literally the same exact array object! They not only have the same contents, they occupy the same memory because they are the exact same object.
Michael Abbott (Dec 22 2022 at 20:40):I also had a mapslices example... internally it does exactly this re-use of one array for every slice. This is written into, passed to f, the result saved elsewhere, and repeat -- safe. But if you explicitly save the array elsewhere, it's always the same one:
julia> store = []; mapslices(rand(Int8,2,3); dims=1) do x
push!(store, x)
sum(x)
end
1×3 Matrix{Int64}:
-225 90 -78
julia> store
3-element Vector{Any}:
Int8[-64, -14]
Int8[-64, -14]
Int8[-64, -14]
Whether the content of the array differs in each iteration is irrelevant - your iterator always returns the same object, so that's what collect sticks in the collected array. It doesn't go around checking whether the contents have changed - that'd be quite a lot of overhead (and hard to do in a generic way).
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:41):Let's say A is collect's array and ri.x is what my iterator returns. I thought what would happen is A[:, n] = ri.x[:], where n is the iteration index.
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:41):an iteration is not indexable - your iterator only returns a single object
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:41):not a collection of objects
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:42):No, but collect knows, since it iterates over the Take iterator.
Michael Abbott (Dec 22 2022 at 20:43):That's what mapslices will do, it makes a matrix A to write slices into -- they are moved to new memory. But the collected array is not a matrix like A, it's a vector containing Vectors, each of which has its own pointer (and in this case they all agree)
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:43):that is also not indexable!
Michael Abbott (Dec 22 2022 at 20:44):Making one big output array and writing into it while iterating is also what stack will do:
julia> using Compat
julia> stack(Iterators.take(ri, 4))
3×4 Matrix{Int64}:
2 1 2 1
3 1 3 2
1 2 3 3
collect (roughly) does this, provided the array has some knowable size:
out = Array{eltype(itr)}(undef, length(itr))
for (idx, obj) in enumerate(itr)
out[idx] = obj
end
out
there is no copy involved and it has no knowledge of whether or not you return the same exact object in each iteration or not
Sukera (Dec 22 2022 at 20:46):(there are some more cases with multidimensional iterators, but those share the non-copying semantics so I'll leave them out for simplicity)
Michael Abbott (Dec 22 2022 at 20:46):And this is very different to having out[:, idx] .= obj in the loop, which copies the values of obj immediately (into out::Matrix instead of out::Vector{Vector{...}})
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:46):@Sukera Agreed -- I see it now, but I didn't see it before.
@Michael Abbott stack looks like what I need here.
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:50):stack is superfast as well... almost zero overhead. I can't wait for v1.9
mbaz (Dec 22 2022 at 20:51):@Sukera @Michael Abbott Thanks for you help!
Last updated: Nov 06 2024 at 04:40 UTC