Regarding the normalization you impose, I get that same normalization to fall out of the equations. From the equations, you get directly (-I)**(m-mp) * (-1)**(j+mp) Which is equal to the expression you gave if you start playing with the exponents.
Sean On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 20:06, Sean Vig <[email protected]> wrote: > If you run the script, it prints the tables, so you can directly >> compare it to Varshalovich. Sean, can you compare the speed of >> evaluation for general beta, using Brian+your fix, versus my >> implementation? Let's use the one, which is faster. > > > I ran some tests with the new routine. Without a simplify step at the end, > the old method is faster, but because the symbolic output is much nicer from > the new method, adding a simplify swings the time advantage towards the new > method. I modified the print_tables method to print timing results; with the > simplify step, the results are here: > http://pastebin.com/phKfMdtu > Time is in seconds for 100 iterations, the 1st time is the old method, and > the 2nd time is the new method. The new method is faster than the old method > more times than not and usually by much larger margins, especially for > larger j. Between this and the fact that the new method gives results that > are much more simplified, my vote is for this new method. > > Sean > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
