On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Sergiu Ivanov <unlimitedscol...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Sergiu Ivanov > <unlimitedscol...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Matthew Rocklin <mrock...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I've found that sorting the args at creation time solves lots of problems. I >>> have not found that this sorting causes any performance issues in SymPy. >>> Sorting is fairly efficient and no one uses FiniteSets for huge sets. >> >> I will make the confession that it's not the first time that I think >> that dropping initial element sorting in FiniteSet wasn't probably >> that very cool an idea performance-wise. > > I guess the time has come to bump this thread :-) > > I will remind the essence of the matter. Some time ago the > constructor of FiniteSet has been modified to _not_ sort .args. This > has created the necessity to explicitly sort FiniteSet's on many > occasions.
Other than printing, what are these situations? Perhaps there is a non-sorting way to solve the problem. > > Currently, however, I have run in yet another occasion where arbitrary > ordering of FiniteSet's comes in the way. FiniteSet relies on > Basic.sort_key to construct the sort key. Basic.sort_key, in its > turn, traverses .args and creates a sort key which _depends_ on the > ordering of .args. I modified pre and post order traversals to use a sort key (so the incoming expression doesn't have to have args presorted). Would this help? I no longer have a pull request with it because I haven't solved the solve and cse randomization failures, but if you want to pull off that single commit it is in my rand branch. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
