On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 23:55:49 -0800, Robert Bradshaw <rober...@math.washington.edu> wrote: > > I think this should go in as (2), perhaps as an optional package to > start with, assuming the performance issues can be addressed (and it > looks like there's been progress made in that area) it would make > sense to eventually move to this as the default. For one thing, it'll > make writing arbitrary complex arithmetic in Cython *much* easier > (currently, one either needs to bear the Python overhead, or keep > track of the imaginary and real parts separately doing all arithmetic > by hand--not ideal even if one ignores the rounding issues). >
This is maybe an obvious point, but I'll make it anyway: MPC is "brought to you by the makers of MPFR". They care a great deal about correctness, performance, and portability. Both packages are actively developed and extensively tested. I think that if the performance cost is small, we would gain a whole lot in terms of reliability. Anyway, as Robert says, it's a good idea to get this going alongside the current implementation and run tests on it for a while. If all goes well, we can decide whether we want to switch. Best, Alex PS: Yann, thanks for all the great work you put into this! I had made a rather feeble attempt at this about a year ago, but had gotten nowhere near what you managed. I'm glad to see this revived so well. -- Alex Ghitza -- Lecturer in Mathematics -- The University of Melbourne -- Australia -- http://www.ms.unimelb.edu.au/~aghitza/
-- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
