Ahahaaha. Well, I wrote what I thought would be a "good if hard to read implementation", and it turns out to be... slower O_O
I still do not really understand why, except that copying the graph takes time, too. For some reason. The code is slower in interesting case, and faster in stupid cases : sage: from sage.graphs.base.static_sparse_graph import girth sage: g = graphs.CubeGraph(12) sage: %time g.girth() CPU times: user 1.03 s, sys: 0.00 s, total: 1.03 s Wall time: 1.04 s 4 sage: %time girth(g) CPU times: user 2.70 s, sys: 0.00 s, total: 2.70 s Wall time: 2.70 s 4 sage: g = graphs.CycleGraph(1000) sage: %time g.girth() CPU times: user 5.31 s, sys: 0.00 s, total: 5.31 s Wall time: 5.32 s 1000 sage: %time girth(g) CPU times: user 0.06 s, sys: 0.00 s, total: 0.06 s Wall time: 0.06 s 1000 I do not really know what to make of it :-D Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-support" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support?hl=en.
cython_girth.patch
Description: Binary data
