I do not believe that the FOR loop is slow. If you post the code you are using, we will most likely find another problem. Without seeing the code, guessing the reasons is impossible.
testData = cell(1, 1e6);
testData(:) = {'12; 123; 45; 45; 0.1'};
dummy = sscanf(testData{1}, '%g;', [1, Inf]); % To get the width
width = numel(dummy);
Result = zeros(width, numel(testData)); % Pre-allocate!!!
for ii = 1:numel(testData)
Result(:, ii) = sscanf(testData{ii}, '%g;', width);
end
Another approach, which consumes more memory - as long as it fits in the processor cache, this could be faster than the loop:
dummy = sscanf(testData{1}, '%g;', [1, Inf]); % To get the width
width = numel(dummy);
dataStr = sprintf('%s;', testData{:});
Result = sscanf(dataStr, '%g;', [width, Inf]);
It looks like you need to transpose(Result) at the end.
The simple FOR-loop follows the important KISS programming paradigm:
Keep it simple stupid!
When the time required for programming and debugging exceeds the runtime, there is no better concept.
