Hello, On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 05:12:34PM +0200, Jens Vollinga wrote:
You are using the hpp extension now for some header files. Why?
AFAIK this is the standard naming convention for C++ headers.
It is not the standard naming convention for GiNaC. It is just creating a mess.
I feel a bit silly -- I don't quite like arguing about names and such. Also I'm not particulary bound to any naming scheme, so let's discuss something more interesting and useful instead.
Also factor.cpp is quite far from being optimal. In particular, univariate polynomials and operations on them are implemented in very inefficient way.
I know, thanks, see the email exchange with Richy.
I'm aware of that. My point is a bit different: I was explaining why I didn't re-use the code from factor.cpp.
Something like umodpoly will do the job. That was the reason why I asked about the future plans of the gcd code because I would then directly use umodpoly and would have to add the addional functionality I need into upoly.cpp.
I was going to convert factor.cpp myself, but I didn't do that because - it might conflict with your changes, so this needs to be coordinated, - if my patches will be rejected that would be a waste time.
But if this code is still going to change heavily,
I don't think upoly (and associated functions) will change. Anyway, I'll update all call sites in a case of any incompatible change(s). Best regards, Alexei -- All science is either physics or stamp collecting.