#16374: better two_squares, three_squares, four_squares for small input
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: vdelecroix | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: number theory | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Vincent Delecroix | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/vdelecroix/16374 | fdf90e6da61efa184245e5e7fb61c27f79bf0396
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by vdelecroix):
* status: needs_work => needs_review
Comment:
Replying to [comment:37 jdemeyer]:
> Small comment: you could make the input type `uint32_t` and use
`uint_fast32_t` for the computation. Then your exceptions will be
platform-independent.
Great. Thanks for the suggestion. Done in the new version and the tests
are updated. I also add a function `is_sum_of_square_pyx` which is much
faster than using `sum_of_squares_pyx` with `try/except`, especially if
the answer is `False`.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16374#comment:39>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
