#16331: Game Theory: Build capacity to solve matching games in to Sage.
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: vinceknight | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.4
Component: game theory | Resolution:
Keywords: Game Theory, | Merged in:
Matching Games, | Reviewers:
Authors: | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: | 0c19d87876a451c349448da3b27101f04162c985
u/vinceknight/game_theory__build_capacity_to_solve_matching_games_in_to_sage_|
Stopgaps:
Dependencies: |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by tscrim):
Replying to [comment:54 kcrisman]:
> Another possible (minor) point:
> {{{
> while len([s for s in suitors if s.partner is False]) != 0:
> }}}
> maybe it would be easier to use `not any()` for that instead of doing a
couple comparisons?
Or an `all()`. This or `not any()` will be faster to fail because it will
short circuit out, whereas building the list (which takes time) will do
the full iteration over all suitors.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16331#comment:57>
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.
