On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Jason Grout
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On 12/21/10 11:36 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Volker Braun<[email protected]>
>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No, it's because your loop is over 10000 rather than 1000.
>>>
>>> Sharp eyes! :)
>>> So, to summarize, with the improved Cython one should always use
>>> isinstance
>>> as it will be optimized to be at least as fast.
>>
>> Yes, as long as the rhs is known by the compiler to be a type
>> (extension or built-in).
>>
>>> I guess we should remove the
>>> PY_TYPE_CHECK macro from Sage altogether and replace every occurrence
>>> with
>>> isinstance?
>>
>> Exactly. However, I just found a compiler crash with isinstance(x,
>> <type>t), so we should wait for the next Cython to go in before doing
>> this. There's a lot of cruft from when Cython just wasn't as good as
>> it is now that's still being used.
>
>
> Do you mean wait until Cython 0.14 goes into Sage, or wait until Cython 0.15
> is released and goes into Sage?

0.14.1, which I'm thinking will be out in January (in time for 4.6.2,
and I think the 4.6.1 window is almost closed anyway).

- Robert

-- 
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URL: http://www.sagemath.org

Reply via email to