Yoooooooooo !! > Thanks for offering -- I can try to review it. (In the old world, I'd say I > can certainly review it,) But I first have to dig through the documentation > of how to review a patch. But I will try doing so then...
HMmmmmmmmmm... It's not exactly a "yes", nor exactly a "no"... :-P > sage: cov > [[((1, 3, 5), (0, 2, 4)), ((2, 3, 5), (0, 1, 4))], > [((1, 3, 5), (0, 2, 4)), ((1, 4, 5), (0, 2, 3))], > [((2, 3, 5), (0, 1, 4)), ((3, 4, 5), (0, 1, 2))], > [((1, 4, 5), (0, 2, 3)), ((2, 4, 5), (0, 3, 1))], > [((2, 4, 5), (0, 3, 1)), ((3, 4, 5), (0, 1, 2))]] > > so my covers are unlabelled graphs with vertices indexed by tuples (of size > <10) of tuples (of size < 6) of integers. You mean. Real tuples, or abstract things with parents/elements categories and everything that take forever to hash and are printed as tuples ? Are those really integers ? :-P > But my impression is that "G = Graph(cov)" should not take considerably > longer than "G = Graph(); G.add_edges(cov)", independent on what cov is, as > long as the outcome is indeed the same. Oh ! That was your problem ? So of course "G = Graph(cov)" should not be much longer than "G = Graph(); G.add_edges(cov)", but the timeit will be quite different indeed ! timeit repeats many times the same command, and sees gives you an idea of the average time. But given what you fed it with, it spends most of its iterations adding edges that already belong to the graph when you run %timeit add_edges(...) Nathann -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
