John J. Lee wrote: >On Sat, 31 Mar 2001, Robert Amesz wrote: > >> Konrad Hinsen wrote: >> >> [Convolution using FFT] >> > >He was just pointing out that it doesn't make sense to take a >non-periodic function, smear it out, and then expect there to be no >end effects. With FFT convolution, for example, you end up smearing >from 'the other end' of your function, whether you like it or not. >You have to reckon on calculating more of your function that you >want to end up with, so you can throw the wrongly smeared regions >out. Oh, I know, but the smear from other types of fast integral transforms might not be as objectionable (i.e. broad) as that of the FFT, so you might not need as much empty guard space to prevent it from folding back. It was just a thought, untried and untested. Robert Amesz
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4