#12808: Optimize ClassCallMetaClass using Cython
--------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Reporter: hivert | Owner: jason
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-5.0
Component: misc | Resolution:
Keywords: classcall UniqueRepresentation | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers:
Authors: Florent Hivert | Merged in:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
--------------------------------------------------+-------------------------
Comment (by hivert):
Hi Simon,
> Also, when `nested_pickle` calls `modify_for_nested_pickle`, it always
looks up `sys.modules[...]` - thus, why not store `sys.modules` in a `cdef
dict` variable?!
Does this give a large speed-up ? I would guess that the dict search is
the
bottleneck, but without serious profiling one cannot be sure.
> I only touched the nested classes, not `ClasscallMetaclass`, and the
test suite isn't completed yet, but most seems to pass.
>
> What next? As I have pointed out, it seems more straight forward to cdef
both `NestedClassMetaclass` and its subclass `ClasscallMetaclass`
directly, not via an additional `ClasscallType`. How should it be
organised?
Sure ! ClasscallType was for me a step before doing more in depth change
in
the Metaclass infrastructure. I was quite scared to do those in depth
change
in Sage/Python and feared a lot of hard to debug segfaults. So I did the
check
by very small steps changing the less possible Sage files. Fortunately, it
went quite smooth. I planned to keep the rest of the metaclass
infrastructure
for another patch but if you think you cdefing NestedClassMetaclass is
easily
done, we can do both at once an thus the need of ClasscallType vanishes.
> Variant 1: I produce a patch that does the changes in nested_class, and
includes most of the changes from your patch (but not `ClasscallType`).
Then I post it here, and we cross-review.
>
> Variant 2: I review your patch from here, and do my changes (which would
revert your changes in the bases of `ClasscallMetaclass`) on a different
ticket.
>
> What do you prefer?
As you wish ! I most probably wont be working on that ticket anymore,
unless
for addressing some reviewer remark or to help you if you need. The two
variants are equal to me and you can consider yourself the owner of that
ticker if you wish. We just need to have some clean review. So if you go
for
variant 2, I think you first need to positive review my change, and then
revamp them and I will review you additions.
So please shoot as you prefer ;-)
Florent
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/12808#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 post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
