On 8 avr, 21:25, "Mike Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have added a benchmark link with Fermat gcd tests, giac seems 5 to
> > 10 * faster than maxima. I don't have magma, it is most probably
>
> > another factor of 10 * faster.
>
> I think that comparison with Magma is a little optimistic, especially
> in the modular case.
>
>
Right, I thought the Opteron was faster than it really is. I have
compiled giac over an Opteron (244) to be able to make a more
meaningfull comparison and updated the timings. The improvements of
magma between version 2.09 (where giac has comparable timings in the
non modular case) and 2.12 suggests that either new algorithms were
found (but I never heard of them) or existing algorithms were improved
(tested with these benchmarks). And maybe, magma 2.12 has speed
improvements related to the 64 bit architecture.
Anyway, using giac would improve the current sage gcd speed and
working on efficiency would benefit to both. Now, if sage developers
are not interested, it's not a main concern for me, giac has it's own
interfaces, but I would find a little bit stupid that these two open-
source softwares which have a common target to provide an alternative
to maple/mathematica would not cooperate.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
