... continued...
Of course it can. Here is one of your 5000 lines of mpz_add's:
cpdef ModuleElement _iadd_(self, ModuleElement right):
# self and right are guaranteed to be Integers, self safe to
mutate
mpz_add(self.value, self.value, (Integerright).value)
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 10:54 PM, rjffate...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with you entirely, which is why I asked about the 5000 lines
with mpz.
One possible answer is, #...@#$%$, Python doesn't have macros.
That is not why the Sage library uses the GMP C library interface in
some places. The
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 11:18 PM, rjffate...@gmail.com wrote:
Look, I agree that it would be a nice language feature. Even the C++
preprocessor doesn't have enough macro expansion for my liking, and C+
+ is one of the languages used in Sage. This is definitely a nice
feature in Lisp. But it
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 9:57 PM, Fredrik
Johanssonfredrik.johans...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Minh Nguyennguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi folks,
I noticed the following thread from the Maxima mailing list.
--
Regards
Minh Van Nguyen
-- Forwarded message
2009/8/17 William Stein wst...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 10:54 PM, rjffate...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with you entirely, which is why I asked about the 5000 lines
with mpz.
One possible answer is, #...@#$%$, Python doesn't have macros.
That is not why the Sage library uses the
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Bill Hartgoodwillh...@googlemail.com wrote:
Actually Python is often vastly slower than Lisp. It is very rarely
faster. The point of python is most certainly not its speed. It is
ease of use, through and through. The whole language was designed with
that in
2009/8/17 William Stein wst...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Bill Hartgoodwillh...@googlemail.com wrote:
Actually Python is often vastly slower than Lisp. It is very rarely
faster. The point of python is most certainly not its speed. It is
ease of use, through and through. The
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Bill Hartgoodwillh...@googlemail.com wrote:
2009/8/17 William Stein wst...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Bill Hartgoodwillh...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Actually Python is often vastly slower than Lisp. It is very rarely
faster. The point of
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 11:28 AM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com wrote:
Ah, that makes sense. It never occurred to me to check if any of the
lisp implementations actually used GMP or MPIR. Now I just recalled
that you recently encouraged ECL to switch from GMP to MPIR. Did they
do so? I recall
Well ECL uses mpz_add 11 times in 73783 lines of Lisp code *not*
including system header files, which I removed, compared to 111
occurrences in Sage's 1.66M lines of Python code (to be honest I am
not sure if it counted the Cython files or not, but what's another
300K lines between friends). Now
Hmm, wait a minute, there is a good chance there's a lot of duplicate
files there, due to HG or something. Perhaps there's only 300K of
python and cython lines of code.
So maybe 111 occurrences is actually a bit high based on this (silly) metric.
Bill.
2009/8/17 Bill Hart
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Bill Hartgoodwillh...@googlemail.com wrote:
So it seems Lisp is actually a bit mpz_add heavy. I'd write to the
authors and complain about that.
Sorry to sound rude, but I am afraid you have no idea what you are
talking about. Common Lisp does not support
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 3:37 AM, Juan Jose
Garcia-Ripolljuanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Bill Hartgoodwillh...@googlemail.com
wrote:
So it seems Lisp is actually a bit mpz_add heavy. I'd write to the
authors and complain about that.
Sorry to
rjf wrote:
Well, I don't know about there being no decent compiler; Sage has
not
chosen Lisps based on technical merit, and may have encountered ones
without decent compilers.
It would be a much more productive use of time to implement macros in
Python. Of course that is being done.
People discussing the merits of languages based on statistical
popularity should note how many newspapers publish astrology columns.
The language shootouts are not entirely relevant, since the question
here has to do with suitability of a language for implementation of
a computer algebra
7. I have no problem with summer-of-code high school or college or ...
students writing programs. Relying on this code as part of the core of
a system is however not such a great plan.
RJF
I allowed myself to answer to this point (7.) on sage-flame.
Cheers,
Georg
On Aug 17, 2:00 pm, gsw georgswe...@googlemail.com wrote:
7. I have no problem with summer-of-code high school or college or ...
students writing programs. Relying on this code as part of the core of
a system is however not such a great plan.
RJF
I allowed myself to answer to this
On 15 Aug, 21:30, rjf fate...@gmail.com wrote:
I am pleased to learn that deficiencies in gmpy are not inherited by
Sage, and that
MPIR, equivalent functionally to GMP is accessible more directly.
It doesn't seem that it should be a point of pride that there are 5000
lines in Sage that
On Aug 16, 3:30 pm, Bill Hart goodwillh...@googlemail.com wrote:
..snip...
{RJF] (mpfr::with-temps (/(- (* (- (* 2 i)1) x t1) (* (- i 1) t0)) i)))
That's a very interesting example. Are you saying that Lisp
automatically divines which MPFR functions to assign to those
operators?
no,
On 17 Aug, 02:28, rjf fate...@gmail.com wrote:
On Aug 16, 3:30 pm, Bill Hart goodwillh...@googlemail.com wrote:
..snip...
{RJF] (mpfr::with-temps (/(- (* (- (* 2 i)1) x t1) (* (- i 1) t0)) i)))
That's a very interesting example. Are you saying that Lisp
automatically divines
I should point out that the vast majority of Sage files do not have
mpz_add in them The below are merely the ones that do.
Bill.
On 17 Aug, 04:04, Bill Hart goodwillh...@googlemail.com wrote:
Just to put this 5000 lines in context, here are counts of the number
of occurrences of mpz_add in
Just to put this 5000 lines in context, here are counts of the number
of occurrences of mpz_add in all the Cython and Python files in Sage:
/sage/modular/modsym/heilbronn.pyx:1
/sage/ext/multi_modular.pyx:2
/sage/combinat/expnums.pyx:1
/sage/modules/vector_integer_dense.pyx:2
First of all, I am confused about Python and macros. If I read this
posting from March, 2009,
Python doesn't have macros.
http://blog.pythonisito.com/2009/03/python-macros.html
So maybe this guy is misinformed?
...snip...
Right, but you could write a similar macro in python. {Scratches
wow, I post one place and it comes out in two places...
Here is an amplification about the comments on GMP and GMPY.
From the perspective of Sage and python, I just took a look at the
current gmpy.
The documentation, which has not apparently been updated since 2003,
says
Early tests have
2009/8/15 rjf fate...@gmail.com:
wow, I post one place and it comes out in two places...
Here is an amplification about the comments on GMP and GMPY.
From the perspective of Sage and python, I just took a look at the
current gmpy.
The documentation, which has not apparently been updated
On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Minh Nguyennguyenmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi folks,
I noticed the following thread from the Maxima mailing list.
--
Regards
Minh Van Nguyen
-- Forwarded message --
From: Richard Fateman fate...@cs.berkeley.edu
Date: Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at
I am pleased to learn that deficiencies in gmpy are not inherited by
Sage, and that
MPIR, equivalent functionally to GMP is accessible more directly.
It doesn't seem that it should be a point of pride that there are 5000
lines in Sage that include mpz_ ...
(e.g. mpz_addmul(a,b,c) computes
27 matches
Mail list logo
