On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 05:34:36AM -0700, Andrew Mathas wrote:
> Did you make a quick benchmark on Partitions().random_element(), with
> and without caching? Given that number_of_partitions (which was
> already fast) was even further optimized recently, maybe caching is
> not relevant anymore?
>
> From the remark in partition.py, I think that whoever cached
> number_of_partitions initially must have done this. I just checked now and
> the speed when the function is cached is quite dramatic:
Ok! Thanks for the updated benchmark.
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
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.
