-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 517
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Use PPL for facet normals of full-dimensional polytopes #22310
Comments
comment:2
Hey Volker! Looking forward to non-full-dimensional case: many years ago #9188 promised in documentation that
I can't recall any reason why this orthogonality would be of any importance, can you? Trying to ensure it (unless PPL for some reason guarantees it already) involves a somewhat long chain of matrix manipulations that you eventually got correct and while it is sad to remove it, doing so will definitely simplify the code and likely make it noticeably faster. New commits:
|
Commit: |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
comment:4
Hi, Travis! Since you were so kind to review the dependency, do you care to take a look at this one? The real change is in the first short commit (the second one is doctest fixing) and that one is mostly copy-pasting old code and constructing the same thing from PPL functions rather than PALP format. |
comment:5
Are the changes in |
Changed keywords from none to days85 |
Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw |
comment:7
Um, what are "honest changes"? The cause for all of them is the change in ordering. Since toric computations often rely on both vertices and normals, things got affected quite a bit. Some tests had to be adjusted themselves (i.e. not just output) because they relied on indices of normals in the list, e.g. for charts. I've done my best to go through all affected cases carefully and reading the context to make sure that they still made sense, although I don't know of an easy way to verify my claim ;-) |
comment:8
I would consider than an honest change, but if you say they are equivalent answers, then that is good enough for me. Thanks; positive review. |
comment:9
Thanks a lot! Naturally, feel free to move to the next one, but it gets more involved, although I tried to make each commit sensible on its own... |
Changed branch from u/novoselt/PPL_for_fulldim_normals to |
Before:
After:
PPL will of course work for non-full-dimensional polytopes as well, however the treatment of this case is spread around several places and its removal will be treated separately. Once this is done the speed up will be even more significant.
Next in the chain of lattice polytope improvements is #22391
Depends on #22309
CC: @vbraun @tscrim
Component: geometry
Keywords: days85
Author: Andrey Novoseltsev
Branch/Commit:
d244793
Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22310
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: