#16101: Python backend for Polyhedra
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: vbraun | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.3
Component: geometry | Resolution:
Keywords: days57 | Merged in:
Authors: Volker Braun | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/vbraun/double_description | 92290e2f9cd2e4293add0544e763873a4b33fe8f
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by vbraun):
Replying to [comment:36 dimpase]:
> Well, it would be OK adding a line in the docs saying that this is a
prototype implementation, and might be painfully slow on largish examples.
This would be better than a impression that things work great already.
How about "this is the world's fastest code for polyhedra over degree > 2
extensions". Because, as far as I know, there is nothing else. IMHO it
does work great.
Also, nothing in the computation really knows about whether a number is
rational or not. There might be memory leaks, or really all kinds of bugs,
in the underlying field implementation. In fact, since there is a whole
load of different fields in Sage it is quite certain that there is a bug
in at least one of them. But whats the point of trying to test field
implementations in the polyhedra module?
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16101#comment:37>
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.
