On Friday, 21 September 2012 17:09:25 UTC+8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > On 2012-09-21 10:52, Volker Braun wrote: > > If there is an implementation that is *always* faster than the > > alternatives then it makes no sense to keep others around. > ...unless you have a simple but slow algorithm which can be used to > check the result of the complicated fast algorithm. >
indeed. In particular if this fast algorithm is a C(++)/assembler implementation done by Ueberhackers in an upstream library... Further, an overhead of extra default arguments should be tolerated, IMHO. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en.
