On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 3:31 PM, mabshoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Jun 9, 3:20 pm, David Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Jonathan Bober wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 10:19 -0700, mabshoff wrote: >> >> >> [...] >> >> No clue. Can you actually compare the gp binary from Sage directly >> >> with the timings from your self builid binary to eliminate the >> >> problem >> >> that libPari is involved here? If the gp binary in Sage is slower >> >> by a >> >> factor of three compared to the one you build this sounds like a bug >> >> to me. But it could also be conversation overhead for example. >> >> > Definitely could be conversion overhead. On my machine (warning: I'm >> > still running the "ridiculously old" Sage 2.10.2) I get >> >> > sage: time y = pari(40000).bernfrac() >> > CPU times: user 4.14 s, sys: 0.00 s, total: 4.14 s >> > Wall time: 4.15 >> > sage: type(y) >> > <type 'sage.libs.pari.gen.gen'> >> > sage: time x = Rational(y) >> > CPU times: user 1.50 s, sys: 0.00 s, total: 1.50 s >> > Wall time: 1.50 >> >> > It looks like the conversion from sage.lib.pari.gen.gen to >> > sage.rings.rational.Rational just converts y to a string and then >> > parses >> > the resulting string, which is why this takes so long. >> >> This is now >> >> http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/3387
Patch up. Please review. William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
