> How does this compare to the cost of testing case "failed" in the old > Union(R,"failed") representation?
I did a crude benchmark on failed?, 200 loops over a vector with 10^6 elements of failed(): 1. Union(NNI, "failed") 0.40s 2. Maybe NNI, 0.38s 3. "generic" Maybe NNI, can't be inlined, 1.24s The problem with "generic" Maybe is that it can't be inlined. About your changes to 'recip', a few comments: 1. There should be a function for 'not retractable?' 2. In xpoly.spad; recip(p) == - p = 0 => "failed" - p.first.k > 1$E => "failed" - (u := recip(p.first.c)) case "failed" => "failed" - (u::R)::% + p = 0 => failed + p.first.k > 1$E => failed + u := recip(p.first.c) + not retractable? u => failed + coerce(retract(u)::%) There are 2 diferent coerce in the last line, I'd consider wrap(unwrap(u)::%) more clear. 3. Again, my reasoning is that, when you see 'retract/coerce', you don't know which type your are retract/coerce from/to, you have to look up the context to know. With wrap/unwrap, you are sure that you are dealing with Maybe. Also, I have rebased my oldk1332/maybe branch a little. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FriCAS - computer algebra system" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
