avoid duplicating code by re-structuring if statement/do loop
Hi I am trying to impose a specific condition on my function at many different spatial points in my grid. However I am duplicating lots of code and it's becoming increasingly inefficient.
How can I do what I need to by simply using a do loop? The specific condition I am trying to impose on my function is the same at all the different spatial points so I figure theres a way to do all of this in a single loop. Or how can I combine all these If/else if statements into a single statement? There must be a more efficient way than what I am doing.
I provided a sample code below.
FUNCTION grad(psi)
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER :: i,j,kk,ll
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: nx = 24, ny = 24
COMPLEX,DIMENSION(3,3,-nx:nx, -ny:ny) :: psi, grad
REAL :: pi
REAL :: f0
INTEGER :: nxx, nyy
nxx = nx/2
nyy = ny/2
pi = 4*atan(1.0)
f0 = pi**2*1.3
DO i=-nx+1,nx-1 !spatial points
DO j=-ny+1,ny-1 !spatial points
IF ( i == 0 .AND. j == 0 .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == nyy .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == -nyy .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == -nyy) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == ny) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == ny) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nx .AND. j == -nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nx .AND. j == nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j)
END DO
END IF
END DO
END DO
END FUNCTION grad
performance if-statement fortran
asked Nov 13 '18 at 20:38
Jeff FaraciJeff Faraci
290419
add a comment |
Hi I am trying to impose a specific condition on my function at many different spatial points in my grid. However I am duplicating lots of code and it's becoming increasingly inefficient.
How can I do what I need to by simply using a do loop? The specific condition I am trying to impose on my function is the same at all the different spatial points so I figure theres a way to do all of this in a single loop. Or how can I combine all these If/else if statements into a single statement? There must be a more efficient way than what I am doing.
I provided a sample code below.
FUNCTION grad(psi)
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER :: i,j,kk,ll
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: nx = 24, ny = 24
COMPLEX,DIMENSION(3,3,-nx:nx, -ny:ny) :: psi, grad
REAL :: pi
REAL :: f0
INTEGER :: nxx, nyy
nxx = nx/2
nyy = ny/2
pi = 4*atan(1.0)
f0 = pi**2*1.3
DO i=-nx+1,nx-1 !spatial points
DO j=-ny+1,ny-1 !spatial points
IF ( i == 0 .AND. j == 0 .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == nyy .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == -nyy .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == -nyy) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == ny) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == ny) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nx .AND. j == -nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nx .AND. j == nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j)
END DO
END IF
END DO
END DO
END FUNCTION grad
performance if-statement fortran
asked Nov 13 '18 at 20:38
Jeff FaraciJeff Faraci
290419
Three simple ideas that come to mind are use .Or., use an include file or call (a probably internal) subroutine. Array syntax would simplify it as well. But I probably wouldn't start from here - I would set the whole grid "default" value and then use separate loops to modify the exceptional values, not an if in sight.
– Ian Bush
Nov 14 '18 at 7:59
@IanBush Thanks for your comment!
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:28
add a comment |
Hi I am trying to impose a specific condition on my function at many different spatial points in my grid. However I am duplicating lots of code and it's becoming increasingly inefficient.
How can I do what I need to by simply using a do loop? The specific condition I am trying to impose on my function is the same at all the different spatial points so I figure theres a way to do all of this in a single loop. Or how can I combine all these If/else if statements into a single statement? There must be a more efficient way than what I am doing.
I provided a sample code below.
FUNCTION grad(psi)
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER :: i,j,kk,ll
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: nx = 24, ny = 24
COMPLEX,DIMENSION(3,3,-nx:nx, -ny:ny) :: psi, grad
REAL :: pi
REAL :: f0
INTEGER :: nxx, nyy
nxx = nx/2
nyy = ny/2
pi = 4*atan(1.0)
f0 = pi**2*1.3
DO i=-nx+1,nx-1 !spatial points
DO j=-ny+1,ny-1 !spatial points
IF ( i == 0 .AND. j == 0 .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == nyy .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == -nyy .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == -nyy) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == ny) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == ny) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nx .AND. j == -nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nx .AND. j == nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j)
END DO
END IF
END DO
END DO
END FUNCTION grad
performance if-statement fortran
asked Nov 13 '18 at 20:38
Jeff FaraciJeff Faraci
290419
Hi I am trying to impose a specific condition on my function at many different spatial points in my grid. However I am duplicating lots of code and it's becoming increasingly inefficient.
How can I do what I need to by simply using a do loop? The specific condition I am trying to impose on my function is the same at all the different spatial points so I figure theres a way to do all of this in a single loop. Or how can I combine all these If/else if statements into a single statement? There must be a more efficient way than what I am doing.
I provided a sample code below.
FUNCTION grad(psi)
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER :: i,j,kk,ll
INTEGER, PARAMETER :: nx = 24, ny = 24
COMPLEX,DIMENSION(3,3,-nx:nx, -ny:ny) :: psi, grad
REAL :: pi
REAL :: f0
INTEGER :: nxx, nyy
nxx = nx/2
nyy = ny/2
pi = 4*atan(1.0)
f0 = pi**2*1.3
DO i=-nx+1,nx-1 !spatial points
DO j=-ny+1,ny-1 !spatial points
IF ( i == 0 .AND. j == 0 .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == nyy .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == -nyy .AND. i == j) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == -nyy) THEN ! I have lots of statements like this
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nxx .AND. j == ny) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == -nxx .AND. j == ny) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nx .AND. j == -nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE IF ( i == nx .AND. j == nyy) THEN
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,1,i,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,2,i,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j) - f0*psi(kk,3,i,j)
END DO
ELSE
DO kk=1,3
grad(kk,1,i,j) = psi(kk,1,i+1,j)
grad(kk,2,i,j) = psi(kk,2,i+1,j)
grad(kk,3,i,j) = psi(kk,3,i+1,j)
END DO
END IF
END DO
END DO
END FUNCTION grad
performance if-statement fortran
performance if-statement fortran
asked Nov 13 '18 at 20:38
Jeff FaraciJeff Faraci
290419
asked Nov 13 '18 at 20:38
Jeff FaraciJeff Faraci
290419
asked Nov 13 '18 at 20:38
Jeff FaraciJeff Faraci
290419
asked Nov 13 '18 at 20:38
Jeff FaraciJeff Faraci
290419
asked Nov 13 '18 at 20:38
Jeff FaraciJeff Faraci
290419
290419
Three simple ideas that come to mind are use .Or., use an include file or call (a probably internal) subroutine. Array syntax would simplify it as well. But I probably wouldn't start from here - I would set the whole grid "default" value and then use separate loops to modify the exceptional values, not an if in sight.
– Ian Bush
Nov 14 '18 at 7:59
@IanBush Thanks for your comment!
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:28
add a comment |
Three simple ideas that come to mind are use .Or., use an include file or call (a probably internal) subroutine. Array syntax would simplify it as well. But I probably wouldn't start from here - I would set the whole grid "default" value and then use separate loops to modify the exceptional values, not an if in sight.
– Ian Bush
Nov 14 '18 at 7:59
@IanBush Thanks for your comment!
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:28
Three simple ideas that come to mind are use .Or., use an include file or call (a probably internal) subroutine. Array syntax would simplify it as well. But I probably wouldn't start from here - I would set the whole grid "default" value and then use separate loops to modify the exceptional values, not an if in sight.
– Ian Bush
Nov 14 '18 at 7:59
Three simple ideas that come to mind are use .Or., use an include file or call (a probably internal) subroutine. Array syntax would simplify it as well. But I probably wouldn't start from here - I would set the whole grid "default" value and then use separate loops to modify the exceptional values, not an if in sight.
– Ian Bush
Nov 14 '18 at 7:59
@IanBush Thanks for your comment!
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:28
@IanBush Thanks for your comment!
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:28
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
If you are looking for conciseness, I'd say you can be much, much more concise than you are. The whole function you provided can be rewritten just like this:
function grad(psi)
implicit none
integer, parameter :: nx = 24, ny = 24, nxx = nx / 2, nyy = ny / 2
real, parameter :: pi = 4 * atan(1.0), f0 = pi ** 2 * 1.3
complex, dimension(3,3,-nx:nx,-ny:ny) :: psi, grad
grad(:,:,-nx+1:nx-1,-ny+1:ny-1) = psi(:,:,-nx+2:nx,-ny+1:ny-1)
grad(:,:,0,0) = psi(:,:,1,0)
grad(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny]) = psi(:,:,[-nxx+1,nxx+1],[-nyy,nyy,ny]) - f0 * psi(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny])
!grad(:,:,nx,[-nyy,nyy]) = psi(:,:,nx+1,[-nyy,nyy]) - f0 * psi(:,:,nx,[-nyy,nyy])
end
As said by @IanBush, assigning the default values then modifying the special cases seems a good aproach. Also, array sections notation is one of the distinctive and powerful features of Fortran language, and can be used to increase expressiveness without compromising clarity.
Pure colons mean all values in this dimension, and a colon between values means only values within this range in this dimension.
So, when I write grad(:,:,-nx+1:nx-1,-ny+1:ny-1) = psi(:,:,-nx+2:nx,-ny+1:ny-1) I mean: i'm assigning values from the array psi to grad; I include all values from the two first dimensions, but only a subset of the two last dimensions (I'm excluding the fisrt and last in each); also, they are mapped directly except for the third dimension, that maps to the next of the equivalent position in psi.
When I write grad(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny]), I am specifying a list of indices instead of a range for the third and fourth dimensions. This will include the total combinations of the two lists: -nxx,-nyy, -nxx,nyy, -nxx,ny, nxx,-nyy...
One advantage of this notation is that, as it is more obvious and closer to the mathematical notation, it is easier to catch inconsistencies. That is why the last line is commented out: an index nx+1, as you would have in the 8th and 9th conditions in the code you wrote, would be out of bounds. I don't know if the sample code you presented is official; if it is, you should correct your algorithm (well, as you are looping only from the second to the second-last indices, you'd actually never touch those conditions...).
As an additional advice, you could put your custom functions in a module, so you could pass all those parameter declarations to the module scope. Moreover, you could then consider assumed-shape array arguments.
answered Nov 14 '18 at 10:19
Rodrigo RodriguesRodrigo Rodrigues
3,0571720
This is exactly what I was looking for. As you've noticed, I'm not so familiar or comfortable with the colon notation. I need to think a bit about your answer and implement it, I'll likely have a few questions as I go through all of this. Thanks a lot for the clear concise answer.
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:27
I just posted a new question that is an extension of this problem. stackoverflow.com/questions/53598732/…. I am trying to modify my code even more now since my list of indices is much bigger than this example. If you have any solution to it, thank you so much! This solution greatly helped me as is, and you're really helping me improve the efficiency of my code.
– Jeff Faraci
Dec 3 '18 at 17:23
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53289143%2favoid-duplicating-code-by-re-structuring-if-statement-do-loop%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
If you are looking for conciseness, I'd say you can be much, much more concise than you are. The whole function you provided can be rewritten just like this:
function grad(psi)
implicit none
integer, parameter :: nx = 24, ny = 24, nxx = nx / 2, nyy = ny / 2
real, parameter :: pi = 4 * atan(1.0), f0 = pi ** 2 * 1.3
complex, dimension(3,3,-nx:nx,-ny:ny) :: psi, grad
grad(:,:,-nx+1:nx-1,-ny+1:ny-1) = psi(:,:,-nx+2:nx,-ny+1:ny-1)
grad(:,:,0,0) = psi(:,:,1,0)
grad(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny]) = psi(:,:,[-nxx+1,nxx+1],[-nyy,nyy,ny]) - f0 * psi(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny])
!grad(:,:,nx,[-nyy,nyy]) = psi(:,:,nx+1,[-nyy,nyy]) - f0 * psi(:,:,nx,[-nyy,nyy])
end
As said by @IanBush, assigning the default values then modifying the special cases seems a good aproach. Also, array sections notation is one of the distinctive and powerful features of Fortran language, and can be used to increase expressiveness without compromising clarity.
Pure colons mean all values in this dimension, and a colon between values means only values within this range in this dimension.
So, when I write grad(:,:,-nx+1:nx-1,-ny+1:ny-1) = psi(:,:,-nx+2:nx,-ny+1:ny-1) I mean: i'm assigning values from the array psi to grad; I include all values from the two first dimensions, but only a subset of the two last dimensions (I'm excluding the fisrt and last in each); also, they are mapped directly except for the third dimension, that maps to the next of the equivalent position in psi.
When I write grad(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny]), I am specifying a list of indices instead of a range for the third and fourth dimensions. This will include the total combinations of the two lists: -nxx,-nyy, -nxx,nyy, -nxx,ny, nxx,-nyy...
One advantage of this notation is that, as it is more obvious and closer to the mathematical notation, it is easier to catch inconsistencies. That is why the last line is commented out: an index nx+1, as you would have in the 8th and 9th conditions in the code you wrote, would be out of bounds. I don't know if the sample code you presented is official; if it is, you should correct your algorithm (well, as you are looping only from the second to the second-last indices, you'd actually never touch those conditions...).
As an additional advice, you could put your custom functions in a module, so you could pass all those parameter declarations to the module scope. Moreover, you could then consider assumed-shape array arguments.
answered Nov 14 '18 at 10:19
Rodrigo RodriguesRodrigo Rodrigues
3,0571720
This is exactly what I was looking for. As you've noticed, I'm not so familiar or comfortable with the colon notation. I need to think a bit about your answer and implement it, I'll likely have a few questions as I go through all of this. Thanks a lot for the clear concise answer.
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:27
I just posted a new question that is an extension of this problem. stackoverflow.com/questions/53598732/…. I am trying to modify my code even more now since my list of indices is much bigger than this example. If you have any solution to it, thank you so much! This solution greatly helped me as is, and you're really helping me improve the efficiency of my code.
– Jeff Faraci
Dec 3 '18 at 17:23
add a comment |
If you are looking for conciseness, I'd say you can be much, much more concise than you are. The whole function you provided can be rewritten just like this:
function grad(psi)
implicit none
integer, parameter :: nx = 24, ny = 24, nxx = nx / 2, nyy = ny / 2
real, parameter :: pi = 4 * atan(1.0), f0 = pi ** 2 * 1.3
complex, dimension(3,3,-nx:nx,-ny:ny) :: psi, grad
grad(:,:,-nx+1:nx-1,-ny+1:ny-1) = psi(:,:,-nx+2:nx,-ny+1:ny-1)
grad(:,:,0,0) = psi(:,:,1,0)
grad(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny]) = psi(:,:,[-nxx+1,nxx+1],[-nyy,nyy,ny]) - f0 * psi(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny])
!grad(:,:,nx,[-nyy,nyy]) = psi(:,:,nx+1,[-nyy,nyy]) - f0 * psi(:,:,nx,[-nyy,nyy])
end
As said by @IanBush, assigning the default values then modifying the special cases seems a good aproach. Also, array sections notation is one of the distinctive and powerful features of Fortran language, and can be used to increase expressiveness without compromising clarity.
Pure colons mean all values in this dimension, and a colon between values means only values within this range in this dimension.
So, when I write grad(:,:,-nx+1:nx-1,-ny+1:ny-1) = psi(:,:,-nx+2:nx,-ny+1:ny-1) I mean: i'm assigning values from the array psi to grad; I include all values from the two first dimensions, but only a subset of the two last dimensions (I'm excluding the fisrt and last in each); also, they are mapped directly except for the third dimension, that maps to the next of the equivalent position in psi.
When I write grad(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny]), I am specifying a list of indices instead of a range for the third and fourth dimensions. This will include the total combinations of the two lists: -nxx,-nyy, -nxx,nyy, -nxx,ny, nxx,-nyy...
One advantage of this notation is that, as it is more obvious and closer to the mathematical notation, it is easier to catch inconsistencies. That is why the last line is commented out: an index nx+1, as you would have in the 8th and 9th conditions in the code you wrote, would be out of bounds. I don't know if the sample code you presented is official; if it is, you should correct your algorithm (well, as you are looping only from the second to the second-last indices, you'd actually never touch those conditions...).
As an additional advice, you could put your custom functions in a module, so you could pass all those parameter declarations to the module scope. Moreover, you could then consider assumed-shape array arguments.
answered Nov 14 '18 at 10:19
Rodrigo RodriguesRodrigo Rodrigues
3,0571720
This is exactly what I was looking for. As you've noticed, I'm not so familiar or comfortable with the colon notation. I need to think a bit about your answer and implement it, I'll likely have a few questions as I go through all of this. Thanks a lot for the clear concise answer.
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:27
I just posted a new question that is an extension of this problem. stackoverflow.com/questions/53598732/…. I am trying to modify my code even more now since my list of indices is much bigger than this example. If you have any solution to it, thank you so much! This solution greatly helped me as is, and you're really helping me improve the efficiency of my code.
– Jeff Faraci
Dec 3 '18 at 17:23
add a comment |
If you are looking for conciseness, I'd say you can be much, much more concise than you are. The whole function you provided can be rewritten just like this:
function grad(psi)
implicit none
integer, parameter :: nx = 24, ny = 24, nxx = nx / 2, nyy = ny / 2
real, parameter :: pi = 4 * atan(1.0), f0 = pi ** 2 * 1.3
complex, dimension(3,3,-nx:nx,-ny:ny) :: psi, grad
grad(:,:,-nx+1:nx-1,-ny+1:ny-1) = psi(:,:,-nx+2:nx,-ny+1:ny-1)
grad(:,:,0,0) = psi(:,:,1,0)
grad(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny]) = psi(:,:,[-nxx+1,nxx+1],[-nyy,nyy,ny]) - f0 * psi(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny])
!grad(:,:,nx,[-nyy,nyy]) = psi(:,:,nx+1,[-nyy,nyy]) - f0 * psi(:,:,nx,[-nyy,nyy])
end
As said by @IanBush, assigning the default values then modifying the special cases seems a good aproach. Also, array sections notation is one of the distinctive and powerful features of Fortran language, and can be used to increase expressiveness without compromising clarity.
Pure colons mean all values in this dimension, and a colon between values means only values within this range in this dimension.
So, when I write grad(:,:,-nx+1:nx-1,-ny+1:ny-1) = psi(:,:,-nx+2:nx,-ny+1:ny-1) I mean: i'm assigning values from the array psi to grad; I include all values from the two first dimensions, but only a subset of the two last dimensions (I'm excluding the fisrt and last in each); also, they are mapped directly except for the third dimension, that maps to the next of the equivalent position in psi.
When I write grad(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny]), I am specifying a list of indices instead of a range for the third and fourth dimensions. This will include the total combinations of the two lists: -nxx,-nyy, -nxx,nyy, -nxx,ny, nxx,-nyy...
One advantage of this notation is that, as it is more obvious and closer to the mathematical notation, it is easier to catch inconsistencies. That is why the last line is commented out: an index nx+1, as you would have in the 8th and 9th conditions in the code you wrote, would be out of bounds. I don't know if the sample code you presented is official; if it is, you should correct your algorithm (well, as you are looping only from the second to the second-last indices, you'd actually never touch those conditions...).
As an additional advice, you could put your custom functions in a module, so you could pass all those parameter declarations to the module scope. Moreover, you could then consider assumed-shape array arguments.
answered Nov 14 '18 at 10:19
Rodrigo RodriguesRodrigo Rodrigues
3,0571720
If you are looking for conciseness, I'd say you can be much, much more concise than you are. The whole function you provided can be rewritten just like this:
function grad(psi)
implicit none
integer, parameter :: nx = 24, ny = 24, nxx = nx / 2, nyy = ny / 2
real, parameter :: pi = 4 * atan(1.0), f0 = pi ** 2 * 1.3
complex, dimension(3,3,-nx:nx,-ny:ny) :: psi, grad
grad(:,:,-nx+1:nx-1,-ny+1:ny-1) = psi(:,:,-nx+2:nx,-ny+1:ny-1)
grad(:,:,0,0) = psi(:,:,1,0)
grad(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny]) = psi(:,:,[-nxx+1,nxx+1],[-nyy,nyy,ny]) - f0 * psi(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny])
!grad(:,:,nx,[-nyy,nyy]) = psi(:,:,nx+1,[-nyy,nyy]) - f0 * psi(:,:,nx,[-nyy,nyy])
end
As said by @IanBush, assigning the default values then modifying the special cases seems a good aproach. Also, array sections notation is one of the distinctive and powerful features of Fortran language, and can be used to increase expressiveness without compromising clarity.
Pure colons mean all values in this dimension, and a colon between values means only values within this range in this dimension.
So, when I write grad(:,:,-nx+1:nx-1,-ny+1:ny-1) = psi(:,:,-nx+2:nx,-ny+1:ny-1) I mean: i'm assigning values from the array psi to grad; I include all values from the two first dimensions, but only a subset of the two last dimensions (I'm excluding the fisrt and last in each); also, they are mapped directly except for the third dimension, that maps to the next of the equivalent position in psi.
When I write grad(:,:,[-nxx,nxx],[-nyy,nyy,ny]), I am specifying a list of indices instead of a range for the third and fourth dimensions. This will include the total combinations of the two lists: -nxx,-nyy, -nxx,nyy, -nxx,ny, nxx,-nyy...
One advantage of this notation is that, as it is more obvious and closer to the mathematical notation, it is easier to catch inconsistencies. That is why the last line is commented out: an index nx+1, as you would have in the 8th and 9th conditions in the code you wrote, would be out of bounds. I don't know if the sample code you presented is official; if it is, you should correct your algorithm (well, as you are looping only from the second to the second-last indices, you'd actually never touch those conditions...).
As an additional advice, you could put your custom functions in a module, so you could pass all those parameter declarations to the module scope. Moreover, you could then consider assumed-shape array arguments.
answered Nov 14 '18 at 10:19
Rodrigo RodriguesRodrigo Rodrigues
3,0571720
edited Nov 14 '18 at 13:15
answered Nov 14 '18 at 10:19
Rodrigo RodriguesRodrigo Rodrigues
3,0571720
answered Nov 14 '18 at 10:19
Rodrigo RodriguesRodrigo Rodrigues
3,0571720
answered Nov 14 '18 at 10:19
Rodrigo RodriguesRodrigo Rodrigues
3,0571720
3,0571720
This is exactly what I was looking for. As you've noticed, I'm not so familiar or comfortable with the colon notation. I need to think a bit about your answer and implement it, I'll likely have a few questions as I go through all of this. Thanks a lot for the clear concise answer.
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:27
I just posted a new question that is an extension of this problem. stackoverflow.com/questions/53598732/…. I am trying to modify my code even more now since my list of indices is much bigger than this example. If you have any solution to it, thank you so much! This solution greatly helped me as is, and you're really helping me improve the efficiency of my code.
– Jeff Faraci
Dec 3 '18 at 17:23
add a comment |
This is exactly what I was looking for. As you've noticed, I'm not so familiar or comfortable with the colon notation. I need to think a bit about your answer and implement it, I'll likely have a few questions as I go through all of this. Thanks a lot for the clear concise answer.
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:27
I just posted a new question that is an extension of this problem. stackoverflow.com/questions/53598732/…. I am trying to modify my code even more now since my list of indices is much bigger than this example. If you have any solution to it, thank you so much! This solution greatly helped me as is, and you're really helping me improve the efficiency of my code.
– Jeff Faraci
Dec 3 '18 at 17:23
This is exactly what I was looking for. As you've noticed, I'm not so familiar or comfortable with the colon notation. I need to think a bit about your answer and implement it, I'll likely have a few questions as I go through all of this. Thanks a lot for the clear concise answer.
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:27
This is exactly what I was looking for. As you've noticed, I'm not so familiar or comfortable with the colon notation. I need to think a bit about your answer and implement it, I'll likely have a few questions as I go through all of this. Thanks a lot for the clear concise answer.
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:27
I just posted a new question that is an extension of this problem. stackoverflow.com/questions/53598732/…. I am trying to modify my code even more now since my list of indices is much bigger than this example. If you have any solution to it, thank you so much! This solution greatly helped me as is, and you're really helping me improve the efficiency of my code.
– Jeff Faraci
Dec 3 '18 at 17:23
I just posted a new question that is an extension of this problem. stackoverflow.com/questions/53598732/…. I am trying to modify my code even more now since my list of indices is much bigger than this example. If you have any solution to it, thank you so much! This solution greatly helped me as is, and you're really helping me improve the efficiency of my code.
– Jeff Faraci
Dec 3 '18 at 17:23
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53289143%2favoid-duplicating-code-by-re-structuring-if-statement-do-loop%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Three simple ideas that come to mind are use .Or., use an include file or call (a probably internal) subroutine. Array syntax would simplify it as well. But I probably wouldn't start from here - I would set the whole grid "default" value and then use separate loops to modify the exceptional values, not an if in sight.
– Ian Bush
Nov 14 '18 at 7:59
@IanBush Thanks for your comment!
– Jeff Faraci
Nov 14 '18 at 15:28