#18109: Restructure IntegerListLex code
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: vdelecroix | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.6
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Jeroen Demeyer | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/jdemeyer/ticket/18109 | 9582a7a5248f609a2d2de02497b4b1d36d9dd96e
Dependencies: #18181, #18184 | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by nthiery):
Hi Jeroen,
Replying to [comment:45 jdemeyer]:
> It's a question of making the backend class independent of `Parent` yes.
I think it's good to have a fast simple Cython backend and a proper Sage
`Parent` front-end.
I agree its good in theory. But if it makes things more complicated,
then it's only good in practice if we have an actual use case.
A main point being: unless we create millions of small IntegerListsLex
objects, I don't see why having it be a (facade) parent makes things
slower.
> I consider that out of the scope of this ticket. These are micro-
optimizations which can be done after we have a clearer view of the final
design.
Fair enough.
> It's certainly annoying, but that's because Cython cannot automatically
(un)pickle extension types. I have to check if it can be simplified.
Thanks!
Cheers,
Nicolas
PS: I forgot to word my appreciation for the hard work!
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18109#comment:46>
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.
