On Oct 28, 2006, at 9:28 PM, Martin Albrecht wrote:
> To elaborate this, this is how the suggestion translates into > Python/Pyrex > code. Please remember the idea is to avoid Python calls (at all > costs). > > Pyrex: > ----------------------------------- > cdef class RingElement: > > def __add__(self,other): > # Python calling convention > return RingElement._add_dispatch(self,other) > > cdef _add_dispatch(self,other): > if hasattr(self,"__dict__"): > return type(self)._add_(self,other) > else: > return self._add_cdef(other) > > cdef _add_(self,other): > return self._add_cdef(other) > > cdef _add_cdef(self,other): > raise NotImplementedError > > cdef class Integer(RingElement): > cdef _add_cdef(self,other): > # C calling convention > # todo: type checks! > print "Integer" > > cdef class CInteger(Integer): > cdef _add_cdef(self,other): > # C calling convention > # todo: type checks! > print "CInteger" > > > Python: > ------------------------------------ > class PInteger(Integer): > def _add_(self,other): > # python calling convention > # todo: type checks! > print "PInteger" > > ------------------------------------ Yes, the "call graph" is correct in your code, although obviously the real code is more complicated. I'm now starting to think "_add_sibling_pyrex" is a better name than "_add_sibling_cdef". Also I still don't like "_add_sibling_dispatch". David --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
