On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Aaron Meurer <[email protected]> wrote: > Did you determine that this was expensive from actual benchmarks? It
I'm really just guessing an extra namespace lookup won't affect things much, but I don't know. I think it is just a matter if you care if the namespace is slightly more polluted or not. I'm fine with both, or either one. > doesn't seem to me like it would be that big of an issue. You can also > probably find clever ways to do it that are more efficient than the niave > methods. > > Then again, I can see how a lot of rebuilds would affect this, so maybe a > _from_rawargs would be worthwhile for internal algorithms that know that > they don't need the checks. > > Aaron Meurer > > > On Saturday, June 9, 2012, David Joyner wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Aleksandar Makelov >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > So it's been suggested ( see the discussion of >> > https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1319 >> > ) that we get rid of the slightly long Permutation and replace it with >> > the shorter Perm in sympy/combinatorics/permutations.py. Keeping with >> > this, we should also rename PermutationGroup to PermGroup in sympy/ >> > combinatorics/perm_groups.py. It sounds like a good idea to me. Are >> > there any objections to that? >> >> Is there an objection to using both? >> It's a simple matter of adding one line to the code. >> >> > >> > Also, there was a discussion about the checks that are performed every >> > time we construct a Permutation object - whether all numbers from 0 to >> > n-1 are present and the arguments provided are the way they should be. >> > They tend to greatly slow down the construction of a Permutation >> > object; on the other hand, it might be helpful to keep them in order >> > to quickly spot if you're doing something stupid. And there are fast >> > factory functions for constructing permutations that skip these >> > checks, like new_from_array_form. But it seems that users might also >> > want to skip the checks if they know what they're doing and are >> > working with permutations of sizes in the millions. >> > >> > So, do you have any suggestions about what we should do, keep the >> > checks, remove them, or something in between? >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > Groups "sympy" 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/sympy?hl=en. >> > >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "sympy" 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/sympy?hl=en. >> > > > -- > Sent from my iPad. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sympy" 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/sympy?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" 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/sympy?hl=en.
