Hellooooooo ! > What exactly is your objection?
Mainly, that the addition of a code in Sage could be justified by saying that "it is needed by a third-party software, even though it has no use in Sage". That's my main objection. > * Is the to_partition() method too obscure that nobody / too few people have a use for it? Well. I find the name *REALLY* vague for a start. Especially when we already have one thousand "connected components" functions with very explicit names. Then, I obviously cannot say that nobody needs that. I dont, that's for sure, but that's only me. This being said, as far as I can tell the only reason for adding this function is to create a map for find_stat. And I can't stand this way of doing things. Then there is the problem of the manyyyyyyy methods we already have in those two classes, and the related comment I added to the ticket. > * Is the decorator overhead (which is just a constant factor, that is, the same complexity) too much? Come on Volker. You don't just read about computers, you use them too. How can you talk about "constant factors" ? Everything is a constant, even the different between Cython and Python, and between Cython and C. I object to that because it does not appear to be necessary at all, and because it can eventually be added to functions to which it will add a non-negligible factor. So why should we pay anything for that when we can do it for free ? It does not make sense to pay *anything* for find_stat even when the code you run has nothing to do with it ! > * Do you object, in principle, to anything that uses more than the absolute minimum of machine instructions? If I see a code that does unnecessary computations and if there is a way to improve it, I try to make this improvement. In this case, the development of find_stat impacts many functions and there is no justification for that. Why should we keep it this way ? > Why are you using and interpreted language and not a compiled language? Well, I need stuff that is in Sage, and Sage is written in Python. So I write Python. When I can, I write Cython code. More generally, the dirtiness of my personal code is my own problem. The dirtiness of what I put into Sage is everybody's problem, so I try to keep it to a minimum. > Or better, why not hand-crafted assembler? Jeroen would refuse the patch because it wouldn't be platform-independent, and I hate to make Jeroen angry. Otherwise I would obviously rewrite everything I see in assembly. Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
