On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:36 AM, Jeroen Demeyer <j.deme...@ugent.be> wrote:
> On 2018-03-12 23:07, Nils Bruin wrote:
>> Your example doesn't convince me at all that we need this change though.
>> You should only consider making a change if you have a real-world
>> example that would significantly benefit and if you can show that
>> degradation in other normal use is minimal. A simplistic "timeit"
>> statement, although instructive, does not necessarily illustrate
>> real-world usage.
> I can imagine a small function constructing a matrix (for which it needs to
> construct the MatrixSpace) to do some computation but not keeping that
> matrix in memory. For example, the output of that function could be the
> determinant of the matrix. If this function is called from a loop, you end
> up in the scenario that I described.
Doesn't Sage allow creating mutable matrices? In a case like that you
should mutate the object rather than go through expensive object
creation over and over.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.