> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Dr. David Kirkby > > > BTW, the use of 'which' is not a good idea. First its non portable. > > Secondly, do we not know the patch of cython? If so, why is it not > > hard-coded? That will save some time. One a 3.33 GHz machine, the > > overhead in calling 'which' is about 5 ms. I don't know how many times > > its called, but it must be hundreds, if not thousands. > > There are almost 300 .pyx files in the Sage library, so that would > only save 1.5 seconds of overhead. I'm sure there is much lower > hanging fruit. > I can confirm this. On sage-on-gentoo I experimented with replacing python 'which python' by just cython after reading Dave's comment. My build logs show there is no significant time saving in doing that. It take about 30 mn either way. The only place I cheat is in the use of ccache in portage. Because most of the .c/.cxx generated rarely change the compilation is quite fast after the cython phase.
Francois -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
