Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail From: srinivas devaki Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: Re: Heap Implementation Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 10:29:38 +0530 Lines: 45 Message-ID: References: <56AD3D83.2050308@mail.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de mtP25lTFCr6Pr4qTzc2ifg3H9GRG+IT63/zxeE3+FRDQ== Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.004 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'url:pypi': 0.03; 'received:209.85.223': 0.03; 'rewrite': 0.07; 'cc:addr:python- list': 0.09; 'url:github': 0.09; 'thread': 0.10; 'python': 0.10; 'jan': 0.11; 'weird': 0.15; '2016': 0.16; 'brilliant': 0.16; 'formatting.': 0.16; 'heap': 0.16; 'heapq': 0.16; 'received:io': 0.16; 'received:psf.io': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'all,': 0.20; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.20; 'cc:2**1': 0.22; 'meant': 0.22; '31,': 0.22; 'fixing': 0.22; 'am,': 0.23; 'elements': 0.23; 'references': 0.23; 'cc:addr:gmail.com': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'compare': 0.27; 'switch': 0.27; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.27; 'post': 0.31; 'topic': 0.32; 'url:python': 0.33; 'grateful': 0.33; 'items.': 0.33; 'open': 0.33; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'best,': 0.35; 'instead': 0.36; 'url:org': 0.36; 'tool': 0.36; 'received:209.85': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'really': 0.37; 'missing': 0.37; 'received:209': 0.38; 'feedback': 0.38; 'some': 0.40; 'your': 0.60; 'skip:u 10': 0.61; 'periodically': 0.66; 'finally': 0.70; 'incredibly': 0.76; 'removal': 0.79; 'combo': 0.84; 'sweeping': 0.84; 'url:2016': 0.84; 'worried': 0.84; 'dare': 0.91 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=7T9I6CPRJ2sX1nlMdvFGvQDMdX56NZYJecc7qJJckhk=; b=ruvjl9FbXKk8X9jzjemWLnoGZQf6vgjcv/gZdstjBZe3rCvP1qqxQ7l0nuQ0tufPCN 8Z/h/AuAS3adigfOhH0dyF+kyfeEe+tI7JjJKxXg/y0qDcZTvtVkvUzbzjRiyTHsiUH3 2inLhf3v5t8sA8KNPGxqN/mkh3gk7x11hqJihhPnGL0oocrlhO5zqEq64DXxSAPidDDD /R6pZLGCVTo3l19PzEuvjuHKfYI98IwM7OXOSkVBvI4ZGzNop3tZQGsNYhQLlLCacrRa +SD62veAk/V//MEkEJEVWlHh946nIig8hb5MLCnr2N0Pbm59+KJ9Mx+tInAPVk//34BI gQsA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=7T9I6CPRJ2sX1nlMdvFGvQDMdX56NZYJecc7qJJckhk=; b=N11trL2Rlyg0SPH+9qLDf/rzeYXyymPDoPTNqx8/pDsAnTwnvEjopuDWi+bTTynIhp pacTDxcEcst5utGjdNf2cBhAyiPUz+mpwWAn8Nrp7veIflmzUtbEuH1fSSdt8PPrtBuL QLTFaIqycgqk6lX3YeYFYFUsN0bDwmcY0v4WD+unQ3E6+pmGkK+s1THSyGWTG/PQMx2W Ryn0t97peMfLhtJ/1E/BUFJPHszyGaO0ico6F27Fiz0McTkYLQeFpLcOMHGsnF6uAVcn Ei6Bx9wA7TMpgxJ2yh6dahvbOxN19KhENuhvxl/LmNcDBJEmLfZIgb1b+uRqljCSRvnp ixcQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOTmC6y3aeE8HZAgaQZo/6pM/lJVia1BYgYEOXsZdhIH5lbuO55isUMfS8JmE4v8FF4FkSNjKFRf6Sgq+w== X-Received: by 10.107.135.30 with SMTP id j30mr17558756iod.103.1454216418061; Sat, 30 Jan 2016 21:00:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <56AD3D83.2050308@mail.de> X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:102333 @Sven actually you are not sweeping at all, as i remember from my last post what i meant by sweeping is periodically deleting the elements which were marked as popped items. kudos on that __setitem__ technique, instead of using references to the items like in HeapDict, it is brilliant of you to simply use __setitem__ On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 4:17 AM, Sven R. Kunze wrote: > Hi again, > > as the topic of the old thread actually was fully discussed, I dare to open > a new one. > > I finally managed to finish my heap implementation. You can find it at > https://pypi.python.org/pypi/xheap + https://github.com/srkunze/xheap. > > I described my motivations and design decisions at > http://srkunze.blogspot.com/2016/01/fast-object-oriented-heap-implementation.html > > @Cem > You've been worried about a C implementation. I can assure you that I did > not intend to rewrite the incredibly fast and well-tested heapq > implementation. I just re-used it. > > I would really be grateful for your feedback as you have first-hand > experience with heaps. > > @srinivas > You might want to have a look at the removal implementation. Do you think it > would be wiser/faster to switch for the sweeping approach? > > I plan to publish some benchmarks to compare heapq and xheap. > > @all > What's the best/standardized tool in Python to perform benchmarking? Right > now, I use a self-made combo of unittest.TestCase and time.time + proper > formatting. > > Best, > Sven > > > PS: fixing some weird typos and added missing part.