Previous: Defining Indexing And Indexed Assignment, Up: Indexing Objects [Contents][Index]
Octave’s ubiquitous lazily-copied pass-by-value semantics implies a problem for
performance of user-defined subsasgn
methods. Imagine the following
call to subsasgn
ss = substruct ("()", {1}); x = subsasgn (x, ss, 1);
where the corresponding method looking like this:
function x = subsasgn (x, ss, val) … x.myfield (ss.subs{1}) = val; endfunction
The problem is that on entry to the subsasgn
method, x
is still
referenced from the caller’s scope, which means that the method will first need
to unshare (copy) x
and x.myfield
before performing the
assignment. Upon completing the call, unless an error occurs, the result is
immediately assigned to x
in the caller’s scope, so that the previous
value of x.myfield
is forgotten. Hence, the Octave language implies a
copy of N elements (N being the size of x.myfield
), where modifying just
a single element would actually suffice. In other words, a constant-time
operation is degraded to linear-time one. This may be a real problem for user
classes that intrinsically store large arrays.
To partially solve the problem Octave uses a special optimization for
user-defined subsasgn
methods coded as m-files. When the method gets
called as a result of the built-in assignment syntax (not a direct
subsasgn
call as shown above), i.e., x(1) = 1
, AND if
the subsasgn
method is declared with identical input and output
arguments, as in the example above, then Octave will ignore the copy of
x
inside the caller’s scope; therefore, any changes made to x
during the method execution will directly affect the caller’s copy as well.
This allows, for instance, defining a polynomial class where modifying a single
element takes constant time.
It is important to understand the implications that this optimization brings.
Since no extra copy of x
will exist in the caller’s scope, it is
solely the callee’s responsibility to not leave x
in an invalid
state if an error occurs during the execution. Also, if the method partially
changes x
and then errors out, the changes will affect x
in the caller’s scope. Deleting or completely replacing x
inside
subsasgn will not do anything, however, only indexed assignments matter.
Since this optimization may change the way code works (especially if badly
written), a built-in variable optimize_subsasgn_calls
is provided to
control it. It is on by default. Another way to avoid the optimization is to
declare subsasgn methods with different output and input arguments like this:
function y = subsasgn (x, ss, val) … endfunction
Previous: Defining Indexing And Indexed Assignment, Up: Indexing Objects [Contents][Index]