Cartesian product is a generic construction, so it should be clear that it is much slower than the super-optimized routines for prime finite fields.
Do you need element-wise multiplication? If you are only interested in the Abelian group structure then there is AbelianGroup([2,3]). Maybe you want IntegerModRing(6). On Wednesday, July 23, 2014 7:13:12 AM UTC-4, Dima Pasechnik wrote: > > in GF(2)xGF(3) addition is about 50 times (!) slower than in GF(7). > sage: c=cartesian_product([GF(2),GF(3)]) > sage: %timeit c((1,1))+c((1,1)) > 10000 loops, best of 3: 67.5 µs per loop > sage: d=GF(7) > sage: %timeit d(1)+d(1) > 1000000 loops, best of 3: 1.44 µs per loop > > This makes it next to useless for serious computations. > How could one speed it up? > Profiling the code will tell you that most time is spent in taking the > tuple apart and putting it back on again, finding the parents, > all in plain Python... > > Should one have a dedicated cartesian_product_of_finite_rings or > something like this? > > > -- 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/d/optout.
