Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #42216

Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]

Date 2013-03-29 14:34 +1100
From Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Subject Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]
References (12 earlier) <mailman.3860.1364451682.2939.python-list@python.org> <987c4bd9-0e5e-4387-9c78-1075a77d3c47@c6g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <mailman.3863.1364463394.2939.python-list@python.org> <rOednY4OeOjbqcnMnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au> <51543f45$0$29998$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
Message-ID <-LGdnWTpyKcdkcjMnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@westnet.com.au> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw


Steven D'Aprano:

> Some string operations need to inspect every character, e.g. str.upper().
> Even for them, the increased complexity of a variable-width encoding
> costs. It's not sufficient to walk the string inspecting a fixed 1, 2 or
> 4 bytes per character. You have to walk the string grabbing 1 byte at a
> time, and then decide whether you need another 1, 2 or 3 bytes. Even
> though it's still O(N), the added bit-masking and overhead of variable-
> width encoding adds to the overall cost.

    It does add to implementation complexity but should only add a small 
amount of time.

    To compare costs, I am using the text of the web site 
http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/ since it has a reasonable amount (10%) of 
multi-byte characters. Since the document fits in the the BMP, Python 
would choose a 2-byte wide implementation so I am emulating that choice 
with a very simple 16-bit table-based upper-caser. Real Unicode case 
conversion code is more concerned with edge cases like Turkic and 
Lithuanian locales and Greek combining characters and also allowing for 
measurement/reallocation for the cases where the result is 
smaller/larger. See, for example, glib's real_toupper in 
https://git.gnome.org/browse/glib/tree/glib/guniprop.c

    Here is some simplified example code that implements upper-casing 
over 16-bit wide (utf16_up) and UTF-8 (utf8_up) buffers:
http://www.scintilla.org/UTF8Up.cxx
    Since I didn't want to spend too much time writing code it only 
handles the BMP and doesn't have upper-case table entries outside ASCII 
for now. If this was going to be worked on further to be made 
maintainable, most of the masking and so forth would be in macros 
similar to UTF8_COMPUTE/UTF8_GET in glib.
    The UTF-8 case ranges from around 5% slower on average in a 32 bit 
release build (VC2012 on an i7 870) to averaging a little faster in a 
64-bit build. They're both around a billion characters per-second.

C:\u\hg\UpUTF\UpUTF>..\x64\Release\UpUTF.exe
Time taken for UTF8 of 80449=0.006528
Time taken for UTF16 of 71525=0.006610
Relative time taken UTF8/UTF16 0.987581

> Any string method that takes a starting offset requires the method to
> walk the string byte-by-byte. I've even seen languages put responsibility
> for dealing with that onto the programmer: the "start offset" is given in
> *bytes*, not characters. I don't remember what language this was... it
> might have been Haskell? Whatever it was, it horrified me.

    It doesn't horrify me - I've been working this way for over 10 years 
and it seems completely natural. You can wrap access in iterators that 
hide the byte offsets if you like. This then ensures that all operations 
on those iterators are safe only allowing the iterator to point at the 
start/end of valid characters.

> Sure. And over a different set of samples, it is less compact. If you
> write a lot of Latin-1, Python will use one byte per character, while
> UTF-8 will use two bytes per character.

    I think you mean writing a lot of Latin-1 characters outside ASCII. 
However, even people writing texts in, say, French will find that only a 
small proportion of their text is outside ASCII and so the cost of UTF-8 
is correspondingly small.

    The counter-problem is that a French document that needs to include 
one mathematical symbol (or emoji) outside Latin-1 will double in size 
as a Python string.

    Neil

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 08:51 +1100
  Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Cousin Stanley <cousinstanley@gmail.com> - 2013-03-25 23:35 +0000
    Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2013-03-25 17:12 -0700
    Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 17:26 +1100
      Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Cousin Stanley <cousinstanley@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 13:38 +0000
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 01:08 +1100
          Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Cousin Stanley <cousinstanley@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 16:41 +0000
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 03:54 +1100
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-03-26 14:24 -0400
  Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 11:50 -0700
    Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 06:03 +1100
      Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 13:44 -0700
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-26 20:50 +0000
          Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-03-26 21:08 +0000
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 08:14 +1100
              Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2013-03-27 12:10 +1300
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2013-03-26 19:19 -0400
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-26 21:26 +0000
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2013-03-26 17:28 -0400
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2013-03-26 23:14 -0400
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 13:30 -0700
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 07:52 +1100
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ned Deily <nad@acm.org> - 2013-03-26 17:00 -0700
          Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-03-26 21:31 -0700
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-27 00:20 +0000
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ned Deily <nad@acm.org> - 2013-03-26 18:31 -0700
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-27 11:51 +0000
          Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-28 01:47 +0000
            flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-27 20:18 -0700
              Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 20:49 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-28 05:20 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 22:42 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-28 07:48 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-03-28 12:54 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-28 13:31 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-03-29 14:52 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-29 08:51 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-03-29 16:50 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-03-29 14:26 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-29 16:07 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 00:35 -0700
                ASCII versus non-ASCII [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-31 08:22 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-31 13:55 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 22:33 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 23:52 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 16:57 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-01 08:14 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-01 08:15 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 06:11 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-01 17:02 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-01 17:07 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 04:20 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-04-01 18:53 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 12:15 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 06:28 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 13:28 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 07:35 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-01 22:38 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-01 22:43 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-02 10:43 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 00:24 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 19:03 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-02 08:35 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 02:24 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-02 10:43 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steve Simmons <square.steve@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 11:58 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 06:42 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-02 14:03 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steve Simmons <square.steve@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 15:39 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-02 16:02 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 08:12 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-02 16:43 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 10:08 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Terry Jan Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-04-02 17:33 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Joshua Landau <joshua.landau.ws@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 23:40 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-04-02 08:09 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-02 15:12 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steve Simmons <square.steve@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 16:03 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-04-02 08:17 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 09:57 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 11:22 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 11:50 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Lele Gaifax <lele@metapensiero.it> - 2013-04-03 00:52 +0200
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 02:20 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 13:44 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 14:31 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 20:53 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 15:03 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 22:11 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 17:22 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 09:28 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 00:38 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 00:10 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 19:15 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 09:25 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 00:34 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 05:32 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Terry Jan Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-04-03 02:19 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 17:27 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 17:25 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 17:29 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 17:52 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 01:06 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 18:24 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 18:37 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 01:07 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 19:22 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2013-04-03 06:20 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 22:05 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2013-04-03 07:52 -0400
                Sorting [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 14:43 +0000
                Re: Sorting [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 11:00 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 10:30 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2013-04-03 13:51 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-04 09:58 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 07:53 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 19:02 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 01:08 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-03 12:27 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 09:43 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 01:17 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 15:07 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 08:57 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 12:09 +0300
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-07 07:24 +1000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-04-06 14:58 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-07 01:29 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 19:58 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-06 22:18 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 23:22 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-07 08:29 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 20:00 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> - 2013-04-07 11:02 +0300
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-07 16:14 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 15:02 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 10:38 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 17:43 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 08:55 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-03 23:39 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 20:49 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 09:10 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-04-03 10:09 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 20:46 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 10:53 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-02 20:28 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-03 14:56 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-01 20:54 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 roy@panix.com (Roy Smith) - 2013-04-01 16:31 -0400
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-29 00:35 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 21:22 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ned Deily <nad@acm.org> - 2013-03-28 13:23 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-27 23:12 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 02:03 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ian Foote <ian@feete.org> - 2013-03-28 09:36 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-03-28 23:11 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-28 13:01 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 07:12 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 01:38 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 08:14 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 02:21 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 08:45 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-03-28 12:01 -0400
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 10:11 -0600
                Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-29 00:39 +0000
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 11:54 +1100
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-29 02:37 +0000
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 13:44 +1100
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 00:11 -0600
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 00:22 -0600
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-03-29 14:06 -0400
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation Christian Heimes <christian@python.org> - 2013-03-29 23:05 +0100
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-29 01:03 +0000
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 12:10 +1100
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-03-29 02:00 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 03:16 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 10:01 -0600
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-03-29 14:34 +1100
                unicode and the FSR [was: Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-28 21:56 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 16:33 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-03-29 16:46 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-03-28 14:51 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-03-29 14:57 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 02:07 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 09:47 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 21:30 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 06:34 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 10:33 -0600
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 09:55 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 04:13 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 10:48 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 04:55 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 13:26 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 08:45 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-03-28 19:12 -0400
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Benjamin Kaplan <benjamin.kaplan@case.edu> - 2013-03-28 13:29 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 14:11 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 14:33 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-03-28 21:50 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Benjamin Kaplan <benjamin.kaplan@case.edu> - 2013-03-28 14:52 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2013-03-28 19:53 -0400
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 11:03 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-29 00:15 +0000
            Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 14:40 +1100
              Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-03-28 16:04 -0700
              Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-03-28 16:04 -0700
            Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-28 12:39 +0000

csiph-web