#10513: Coercion and category framework for modules
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: SimonKing | Owner: robertwb
Type: defect | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-pending
Component: coercion | Resolution:
Keywords: coercion, | Merged in:
category framework, modules | Reviewers: Jean-Pierre Flori
Authors: Simon King, Peter | Work issues:
Bruin | Commit:
Report Upstream: N/A | b1287e75962a2dc590f1fa22acc90a4e53383aab
Branch: | Stopgaps:
u/jdemeyer/ticket/10513 |
Dependencies: #16507, #17578, |
#17561 |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by pbruin):
Replying to [comment:47 nbruin]:
> On the other hand, part of this might by due to `GF(p)` construction by
itself. If I first do `L=[GF(p) for p in prime_range(10^5)]` the run time
drops to 1.19 s, there are less calls to join (exactly one per constructed
field, so `GF(p)` seems to need two category joins) and the impact of
`category.join` drops to `0.086`, which is about 6-7% of the run time
then.
Indeed, the category of `GF(p)` is a join of three categories:
{{{
sage: GF(3).category()
Join of Category of finite fields and Category of subquotients of monoids
and Category of quotients of semigroups
}}}
Maybe parts of the category code (like `join`) should be transformed into
Cython to make it faster?
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10513#comment:48>
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.
