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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #11972

Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1")

Path csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!feeder.news-service.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path <rosuav@gmail.com>
X-Original-To python-list@python.org
Delivered-To python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status OK 0.027
X-Spam-Evidence '*H*': 0.95; '*S*': 0.00; ':-)': 0.06; 'python': 0.08; 'operation,': 0.09; 'subject:" ': 0.10; 'algorithm': 0.13; 'algorithmic': 0.16; 'andreas': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'subject:=': 0.16; "wouldn't": 0.17; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.22; '(even': 0.29; 'message- id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.29; 'do.': 0.30; 'agreed.': 0.30; 'equivalent': 0.31; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.33; 'improvements': 0.34; 'shorter': 0.34; 'using': 0.37; 'but': 0.37; 'think': 0.38; 'some': 0.38; 'received:google.com': 0.38; 'received:209.85': 0.38; 'subject:: ': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'subject: (': 0.39; 'where': 0.40; 'easily': 0.61; 'your': 0.61; 'alternative': 0.64; 'ever': 0.65; '"for': 0.67; 'subject:+': 0.73
DKIM-Signature v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ObAg/agXmSTphjTjOQ1Txe5F0aggYrrquH1qednr1cc=; b=ASTYH2rMgCoG00ne1dYYvyefUr7m67+Nzf6dSDNXxCybUjdcc+KXmwGHzwPEEeU39F mBRgExiqfRG0TGdjedfv07drGTW0KE7/ooU2BQVVxce3ZwmR4c11hkcz20/ET+yPi9zy GrssK3SuwHylJdJ6lp6n2Ya2LEXRMY/nJxsig=
MIME-Version 1.0
In-Reply-To <1313969134.3135.21.camel@thegeorge>
References <4e513ceb$0$23863$e4fe514c@news2.news.xs4all.nl> <1313947658.3424.3.camel@thegeorge> <mailman.285.1313955635.27778.python-list@python.org> <747a8223-0a9b-4691-8886-0a04433e54dc@glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com> <1313969134.3135.21.camel@thegeorge>
Date Mon, 22 Aug 2011 00:41:43 +0100
Subject Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1")
From Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
To python-list@python.org
Content-Type text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding quoted-printable
X-BeenThere python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version 2.1.12
Precedence list
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.292.1313970106.27778.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines 16
NNTP-Posting-Host 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace 1313970106 news.xs4all.nl 23929 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:35792
X-Complaints-To abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:11972

Show key headers only | View raw

2011/8/22 Andreas Löscher <andreas.loescher@s2005.tu-chemnitz.de>:
> But every improvement on your algorithm will easily result in a
> significant shorter execution time than replaceing a+=1 with a=a+1 will
> ever do. :-)
>

Agreed. If Python needed a faster alternative to "a=a+1", then I would
recommend an "a.inc()" call or something; some way to avoid looking up
the value of 1. (An equivalent to C's ++a operation, if you like.) But
I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any situation where improving
the speed of incrementing will be significant, that wouldn't be better
served by algorithmic improvements (even just using "for a in
range()") or dropping to C.

ChrisA

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

Thread

Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Andreas Löscher <andreas.loescher@s2005.tu-chemnitz.de> - 2011-08-21 19:27 +0200
  Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Laurent <laurent.payot@gmail.com> - 2011-08-21 10:48 -0700
    Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Laurent <laurent.payot@gmail.com> - 2011-08-21 11:03 -0700
  Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de> - 2011-08-21 20:24 +0200
    Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-08-21 14:52 -0400
      Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Andreas Löscher <andreas.loescher@s2005.tu-chemnitz.de> - 2011-08-22 01:17 +0200
        Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-08-22 00:37 +0100
        Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-08-21 19:38 -0400
          Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Andreas Löscher <andreas.loescher@s2005.tu-chemnitz.de> - 2011-08-22 02:00 +0200
        Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-22 05:33 +0000
  Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-08-21 15:39 -0400
    Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Laurent <laurent.payot@gmail.com> - 2011-08-21 12:53 -0700
      Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Laurent <laurent.payot@gmail.com> - 2011-08-21 12:55 -0700
      Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Laurent <laurent.payot@gmail.com> - 2011-08-21 12:55 -0700
      Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-08-22 11:12 +1000
        Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") "Richard D. Moores" <rdmoores@gmail.com> - 2011-08-22 02:55 -0700
        Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2011-08-22 09:35 -0700
        Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2011-08-22 10:22 -0700
    Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Laurent <laurent.payot@gmail.com> - 2011-08-21 13:04 -0700
    Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Laurent <laurent.payot@gmail.com> - 2011-08-21 12:53 -0700
      Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Andreas Löscher <andreas.loescher@s2005.tu-chemnitz.de> - 2011-08-22 01:25 +0200
        Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-08-22 00:41 +0100
          Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-08-22 11:16 +1000
        Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de> - 2011-08-22 04:04 +0200
        Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-08-21 22:11 -0400
      Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Stephen Hansen <me+list/python@ixokai.io> - 2011-08-21 19:08 -0700
        Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-08-22 14:14 +1000
          Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Stephen Hansen <me+list/python@ixokai.io> - 2011-08-21 21:37 -0700
          Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") Stephen Hansen <me+list/python@ixokai.io> - 2011-08-21 21:49 -0700
  Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") casevh <casevh@gmail.com> - 2011-08-21 21:14 -0700

csiph-web