I commit the change -- I now do
if D != {}:
a = D[iter(D).next()]
if hasattr(a,'parent') and hasattr(a.parent(),'zero'):
zero = a.parent().zero()
else:
zero = 0
for_removal = [key for key in D if D[key] == zero]
for key in for_removal:
del D[key]
Could you please recheck if that solves your problem.
@Nicolas: calling python methods in cython always slows down
everything, that's why I check equality rather that calling is_zero.
Also, your suggestion to construct a new dict at the end, rather than
deleting the keys with values being zero, slows down the process. I
will do some benchmarks in a quite minute...
Best, Christian
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:17 AM, Christian Stump
<christian.st...@lacim.ca> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> The final fix will need discussion. In the mean time, just add a micro
>> patch just before yours to fix dict_addition ``itervalue``.
>
> That was my mistake last week when I changed the code -- sorry!
>
> I will fix that in the next 2 hours and push...
>
> Best, Christian
>
--
Christian Stump
LaCIM, Université du Québec à Montréal
christian.st...@lacim.ca
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/christian.stump/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-combinat-devel" group.
To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en.
