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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #42567

Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3

Path csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!xlned.com!feeder5.xlned.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path <square.steve@gmail.com>
X-Original-To python-list@python.org
Delivered-To python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status OK 0.097
X-Spam-Evidence '*H*': 0.81; '*S*': 0.00; 'url:pipermail': 0.05; 'subject:Python': 0.06; 'important,': 0.07; 'reason,': 0.07; 'steve': 0.09; 'string': 0.09; 'lawrence': 0.09; 'repeated': 0.09; 'python': 0.11; 'bug': 0.12; 'dependent.': 0.16; 'mandate': 0.16; 'mark,': 0.16; 'regression': 0.16; 'troll': 0.16; 'unicode,': 0.16; 'up*': 0.16; 'demonstrate': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'drawing': 0.19; 'first.': 0.19; 'seems': 0.21; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.23; "haven't": 0.24; 'handling': 0.26; 'post': 0.26; 'least': 0.26; 'subject:/': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'feature': 0.29; 'url:bugs': 0.29; 'primarily': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; "skip:' 10": 0.31; 'towards': 0.31; '+0100,': 0.31; "d'aprano": 0.31; 'extending': 0.31; 'please.': 0.31; 'steven': 0.31; 'trivial': 0.31; 'this.': 0.32; 'extend': 0.32; 'url:python': 0.33; 'community': 0.33; 'position.': 0.33; 'actual': 0.34; 'problem': 0.35; 'created': 0.35; 'except': 0.35; 'test': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'i.e.': 0.36; 'done': 0.36; "didn't": 0.36; 'url:org': 0.36; 'operating': 0.37; 'two': 0.37; 'list': 0.37; 'performance': 0.37; 'message-id:@gmail.com': 0.38; 'saves': 0.38; 'whatever': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'track': 0.38; 'that,': 0.38; 'moving': 0.39; 'quote': 0.39; 'sure': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'enough': 0.39; 'url:mail': 0.40; 'how': 0.40; 'even': 0.60; 'skip:u 10': 0.60; 'hardware': 0.61; 'lost': 0.61; 'profile': 0.61; 'simply': 0.61; 'first': 0.61; 'back': 0.62; 'reached': 0.63; 'interest': 0.64; 'more': 0.64; 'forward': 0.65; 'header:Reply-To:1': 0.67; 'believe': 0.68; 'real-world': 0.68; 'saving': 0.69; 'reply-to:no real name:2**0': 0.71; 'brand': 0.72; 'lack': 0.78; 'reply- to:addr:gmail.com': 0.80; 'choices.': 0.84; 'demonstrates': 0.84; 'diagnosing': 0.84; 'off,': 0.84; 'results,': 0.84; 'seriously,': 0.84; 'simmons': 0.84; 'subject:long': 0.84; 'approach.': 0.91; 'outcome': 0.93; '2013': 0.98
DKIM-Signature v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=J2DqYeYLlIsEGf73dzDF8fPxnPEi3Db2s7dV8LocKys=; b=kjkQJseoqBxxNJpGOsnqzBCa9zdDYcO//ndHdqd02zMjiFKPkjLsHAYI+pHdhsp8aj VpnVuaZ42zvQs4hpA/d/Tfb+QwCRlOrfzL5tW9Du0hbStap2wFhx8D5puyoiMSmP4few Sw5oOWV41lM8wA/ByUCaRUCUG4xst33ppbYlgmjxsR9UO2XmoaLlFDhg5UbeuEaypnk1 XlEkkTnPdIva3xIsvDq/B512it1bRtewkVdNJj0ID9TkgZdRJAdxF8qtaNxkEprRtpqG BBl2nhxtd5FxVa7sX6wMoYCDb06tBHdOYFX9/vKA0jYfUsS7joVLSv1qMFMDOhcP/6ih SkWg==
X-Received by 10.194.119.33 with SMTP id kr1mr22285038wjb.36.1364913555430; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 07:39:15 -0700 (PDT)
Date Tue, 02 Apr 2013 15:39:10 +0100
From Steve Simmons <square.steve@gmail.com>
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4
MIME-Version 1.0
To python-list@python.org
Subject Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3
References <mailman.3703.1364248275.2939.python-list@python.org> <515941d8$0$29967$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <roy-04FB84.08155301042013@news.panix.com> <5159beb6$0$29967$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.5.1364838820.17481.python-list@python.org> <4103dc28-a0dc-4740-bb38-b6bcb58bedfb@h1g2000vbx.googlegroups.com> <mailman.11.1364844536.17481.python-list@python.org> <ba4dc276-a3a4-4dc5-a1a8-8345174cbe7a@he10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <mailman.19.1364852532.17481.python-list@python.org> <Y5adnc_9yJMbgcfMnZ2dnUVZ_s2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au> <d23a1931-7199-4550-9a87-697ee9413408@cd3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <mailman.30.1364889805.17481.python-list@python.org> <515a9851$0$29891$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <c4edd28c-3716-4f5d-b3c6-30f278882f12@a14g2000vbm.googlegroups.com> <kje96n$c04$1@ger.gmane.org> <mailman.35.1364900300.17481.python-list@python.org> <515ae520$0$29967$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
In-Reply-To <515ae520$0$29967$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
Content-Type text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-BeenThere python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version 2.1.15
Precedence list
Reply-To square.steve@gmail.com
List-Id General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe <http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Message-ID <mailman.0.1364913558.3114.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines 53
NNTP-Posting-Host 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace 1364913558 news.xs4all.nl 6964 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:46133
X-Complaints-To abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.python:42567

Show key headers only | View raw

On 02/04/2013 15:03, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 11:58:11 +0100, Steve Simmons wrote:
>
>> It seems to me that jmf *might* be moving towards a vindicated position.
>>   There is some interest now in duplicating, understanding and
>> (hopefully!) extending his test results, which can only be a Good Thing
>> - whatever the outcome and wherever the facepalm might land.
> Some interest "now"? Oh please.
>
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2012-September/629810.html
>
> Mark Lawrence even created a bug report to track this, also back in
> September.
>
> http://bugs.python.org/issue16061
>
> I'm sure you didn't intend to be insulting, but some of us *have* taken
> JMF seriously, at least at first. His repeated overblown claims of how
> Python is destroying Unicode, his lack of acknowledgement that other
> people have seen string handling *speed up* not slow down, and his
> refusal to assist in diagnosing this performance regression except to
> repeatedly quote the same artificial micro-benchmarks over and over again
> have lost him whatever credibility he started with.
>
> This feature is a *memory optimization*, not a speed optimization, and
> yet as a side-effect of saving memory, it also saves time. Real-world
> benchmarks of actual applications demonstrate this. One or two trivial
> slowdowns of artificial micro-benchmarks simply are not important, even
> if they are genuine. I believe they are genuine, but likely operating
> system and hardware dependent.
>
>
First off, no insult intended and I haven't been part of this list long 
enough to be fully immersed in the history of this so I'm sure there are 
events of which I am unaware.

However, it seems to me that, for whatever reason, JMF has reached the 
end of his capacity (time, capability, patience, ...) to extend his 
benchmarks into a more credible test set - i.e. one that demonstrates an 
acceptably 'real life' profile with a marked drop in performance.  As a 
community we have choices.  We can brand him a Troll - and some of his 
behaviour may mandate that - or we can put some additional energy into 
drawing this 'disagreement' to a more amicable and constructive conclusion.

My post was primarily aimed at recognising the work that people like 
Mark, Neil and others have done to move the problem forward and was 
intended to help shift the focus to a more productive approach. Again, 
my apologies if it was ill timed or ill-directed.

Steve Simmons

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous 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