On Oct 24, 9:08 am, Simon King <simon.k...@nuigalway.ie> wrote: > My impression is that a big change in the category framework, > infiltrating many parts of Sage, should be discussed here. Do people > think that a gain in flexibility provided by my additions to the > category framework would justify a performance loss of 1.5%?
Your present proposal doesn't give any upsides for the slowdown. Could you give some convincing use-cases, where you give examples of things that people are likely to want to do which become easy with your extension but are very difficult or impossible in the current model? Perhaps you can find examples in the library code or the doctests that really benefit. Generalizing code for the sake of generalization and at the expense of efficiency is probably a bad choice, especially for something so pervasive as the category framework, but if you can show that the more general code is necessary to do things people actually want, it becomes worth evaluating what the slowdowns are and if one can avoid the slowdowns, or even accept them if they are unavoidable. The 1.5% you are giving is a nice guide, but it doesn't really show that there is a slow-down, nor how badly this is going to affect existing code. Could you try to identify which things are slowed down? All operations? just certain coercions? Perhaps look at the timing of separate modules and see which contribute most to that 1.5%. -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
