[sage-devel] Re: Can we afford a new attribute of sage.structure.element.Element?

Hi Robert, Thank you for resuming this thread. On 31 Mai, 08:13, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > > So, the additional memory usage seems affordable to me. > > Elements of small finite fields are cached, so this test doesn't > really show anything. > > sage: GF(2)(1) is GF(2)(-1) > True I see. I am tr

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Can we afford a new attribute of sage.structure.element.Element?

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Simon King wrote: > Hi Robert, > > Thank you for resuming this thread. > > On 31 Mai, 08:13, Robert Bradshaw > wrote: >> > So, the additional memory usage seems affordable to me. >> >> Elements of small finite fields are cached, so this test doesn't >> really sho

Re: [sage-devel] Re: Can we afford a new attribute of sage.structure.element.Element?

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 1:23 AM, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 12:23 AM, Simon King wrote: >> Hi Robert, >> >> Thank you for resuming this thread. >> >> On 31 Mai, 08:13, Robert Bradshaw >> wrote: >>> > So, the additional memory usage seems affordable to me. >>> >>> Elements o

Re: [sage-devel] patch ticket says it was merged, but patch doesn't appear to be merged

On 2011-05-30 20:54, Jason Grout wrote: > I just noticed that > > http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7002 > > says it was merged a long time ago, but the help file that you get when > clicking "Help" in 4.7 in the notebook, the line "Autoevaluate Cells on > Load" still lists the old text.

[sage-devel] Re: patch ticket says it was merged, but patch doesn't appear to be merged

On 5/31/11 3:59 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: On 2011-05-30 20:54, Jason Grout wrote: I just noticed that http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7002 says it was merged a long time ago, but the help file that you get when clicking "Help" in 4.7 in the notebook, the line "Autoevaluate Cells on L