On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 14:43:55 -0700, David Harvey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's pretty impressive! > > So it seems if we want to get any faster than that, we need to work > on the Python object construction stuff. To be honest, I'm a bit sick > of thinking about that at the moment. It's something we could come > back to later. I think we have enough work to do implementing more > widely the stuff we worked on at SAGE days 2.
I completely agree with this. I really really want to get on with doing some implementation more widely. > Try a sage -t on the whole library with omalloc, and if that works, I > say patch it in permanently. There will be a lot of places to change from Pymem and traditional malloc. One should go through the whole code base, change them all to use a macro like sage_malloc, then set that to omalloc, do "make test", and finally send me a patch. -- William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
