#16659: Decomposition of finite dimensional associative algebras
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: virmaux | Owner:
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_work
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.4
Component: algebra | Resolution:
Keywords: representation | Merged in:
theory, days64, sd67 | Reviewers: Franco Saliola
Authors: Aladin Virmaux | Work issues: merge in develop.
Report Upstream: N/A | Commit:
Branch: u/virmaux/t/16659 | 06de5188ee34750760d480c1920afcfc1f40408d
Dependencies: #11111 | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by nthiery):
Replying to [comment:63 saliola]:
> I'm surprised that there is such a big difference. I just took your
method and re-wrote it to be easier to read (I wanted to avoid the nested
list comprehensions). But speed is more important. :-)
The main difference is that the reinstated version takes advantage of
the sparsity of the products. Of course this makes a bigger difference
for a monoid algebra than for an average algebra; so the benchmark is
not completely fair. But still, many of our algebras are rather
sparse, so that's good.
On another note: I actually tend to find nested list comprehensions
more readable than for loops because they highlight the intent. But
that's indeed only valid if one does not need to do weird stuff to
make it fit into the functional style.
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16659#comment:64>
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.
