[sage-devel] Re: Suggestion for GSoC project: Polynomials - Rewriting and relinking

[Johan S . H . Rosenkilde]

Jean-Pierre Flori writes:
>>
>> I would be very interested in working on this.

Cool :-) Let's discuss the project description off the mailing list.


Also, thanks Peter for your input. We should definitely take a closer
look at #15601.

Best,
Johan

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[sage-devel] Re: Suggestion for GSoC project: Polynomials - Rewriting and relinking

[Peter Bruin]

Hello,

Johan S. H. Rosenkilde  wrote:

> Our current polynomial implementation has severe issues:
>
> - Our speed for GF(2^e)[x] is abysmal.
>
> - For other cases we are probably not linking to the currently fastest
>   libraries.
>
> - We don't have multi-point evaluation or fast Lagrange interpolation,
>   even though the libraries we link to often have this.
>
> - Bruno Grenet remarked at SD75 that there were issues and lots of
>   crufted code in the class structure handling generic/specific and
>   dense/sparse/etc. polynomials.
>
> - Jeroen Demeyer remarked that the Cython code is from the prehistoric
>   era and has lots of cruft from back when Cython was a lot more
>   primitive than it is now.
>
> - add more things yourself.
>
> Considering how central polynomial arithmetic is in many parts of
> algebra, I think this is bad, and it impedes gradual improvement (e.g. I
> am at a loss on how to improve the GF(2^e)[x] thing which is my personal
> main itch).
>
> I would be interested in co-mentoring such a GSoC project for improving
> this. But I lack understanding of, especially Cython and linking. I
> would like to know if someone else would be a co-mentor with me on this,
> or technical advisor on e.g. Cython issues.

It would indeed be a big step forward to improve polynomial arithmetic.
A long time ago I wrote an implementation of power series using PARI:
https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15601
This is not merged yet, but could be useful to get an impression of the
sort and amount of work to be done for new polynomial implementations
(although the interfaces of e.g. NTL and FLINT are of course different).
Unfortunately I personally won't have a lot of free time to help with a
GSoC project...

Peter

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[sage-devel] Re: Suggestion for GSoC project: Polynomials - Rewriting and relinking

[Jean-Pierre Flori]

On Friday, January 20, 2017 at 11:03:52 AM UTC+1, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde 
wrote:
>
> Hi sage-devel, 
>
> Our current polynomial implementation has severe issues: 
>
> - Our speed for GF(2^e)[x] is abysmal. 
>
> - For other cases we are probably not linking to the currently fastest 
>   libraries. 
>
> - We don't have multi-point evaluation or fast Lagrange interpolation, 
>   even though the libraries we link to often have this. 
>
> - Bruno Grenet remarked at SD75 that there were issues and lots of 
>   crufted code in the class structure handling generic/specific and 
>   dense/sparse/etc. polynomials. 
>
> - Jeroen Demeyer remarked that the Cython code is from the prehistoric 
>   era and has lots of cruft from back when Cython was a lot more 
>   primitive than it is now. 
>
> - add more things yourself. 
>
> Considering how central polynomial arithmetic is in many parts of 
> algebra, I think this is bad, and it impedes gradual improvement (e.g. I 
> am at a loss on how to improve the GF(2^e)[x] thing which is my personal 
> main itch). 
>
> I would be interested in co-mentoring such a GSoC project for improving 
> this. But I lack understanding of, especially Cython and linking. I 
> would like to know if someone else would be a co-mentor with me on this, 
> or technical advisor on e.g. Cython issues. 
>
> Best, 
> Johan 
>
>
> I would be very interested in working on this.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.