On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 09:30:37PM +0200, Christian Stump wrote:
> > That is, if we postpone the optimization of the various methods to take
> > better advantage of clonable lists, but that's ok.
>
> would this eventually also improve the speed to check dict containment
> of such elements?
The hash and equality are cythonized, as well as the list
structure. So in principle this should be faster, though I could not
tell by how much. You can probably do some timings with
the examples provided in list_clone_demo.pyx / list_clone_timings.pyx.
Also, the hash will be cached; so if it's always the same element that
you are testing for (not a copy of it) this should be another
improvement.
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 unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
