Am 23.04.2014 02:16, schrieb Aaron Meurer:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Joachim Durchholz <[email protected]> wrote:
The goals are written above. I am myself concentrating on speed,
that's what I really want to nail down.
I'm somewhat sceptical about this.
A conversion to C++ will give a linear improvement.
Better algorithms can improve the big-Oh class.
Unless algorithmic improvements have been exhausted, this would be premature
optimization. (Are algorithmic improvements exhausted yet?)
That is true. I usually prefer to use faster algorithms.
But to be the devil's advocate, there are two issues with this line of thinking:
- Big O is basically useless.
Um... well, no, it does have its relevance, particularly if your code is
supposed to scale - and SymPy certainly should scale at least in some
areas (such as increasing matrix sizes).
You're right that linear factors and constant overheads must not be ignored.
It's important in SymPy already :-)
... and still, the point stands: Improving the Python side of things
algorithmically, even if it reduces "just" constant overheads and linear
factors, would still be very useful, and they'd come without the costs
associated with having a second programming language in the system.
My biggest fear is that CSymPy will result in a fast but somewhat
brittle system, with all the associated frustrations (mainly for Ondrej
so the damage is limited but still).
We'll see.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy" 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/sympy.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/53589EAB.2000608%40durchholz.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
