On Friday, 6 August 2021 at 16:31:23 UTC-7 [email protected] wrote:
> To clarify, by "similar reasons to numpy", I meant that you open up
> the possibility of using Cython, vectorized operations, JITs like
> numba, etc. Some of these provide order of magnitude speedups and
> aren't an option with generic Python lists.
To clarify, this thread certainly didn't start out with the question if
sage should have mutable vectors at all (although I do think that in most
cases, an array would then work just as well). I think it is worth
reconsidering whether all vectors need to start out their life being
mutable, because that does come with a significant usability penalty in
hash-related scenarios.
It is indeed the case that we could just spell these examples as
{tuple(v+w): ... }, and probably that is what cached_function argument
manglers do, but .... to me that just looks super ugly (and the annoying
part is that it'll take me a error for every time I need to insert that).
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/430ef312-156b-4364-8b73-456429d9decan%40googlegroups.com.
