Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #11983
| Path | csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!feeder.news-service.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed6.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| Return-Path | <python-python-list@m.gmane.org> |
| X-Original-To | python-list@python.org |
| Delivered-To | python-list@mail.python.org |
| X-Spam-Status | OK 0.005 |
| X-Spam-Evidence | '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; ':-)': 0.06; 'compiler': 0.07; 'python': 0.08; 'counting': 0.09; 'integers': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229.12': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'received:lo.gmane.org': 0.09; 'subject:" ': 0.10; 'algorithm': 0.13; 'andreas': 0.16; 'computation': 0.16; 'subject:=': 0.16; 'language': 0.17; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.22; 'code': 0.25; '(in': 0.26; 'code.': 0.26; 'loop': 0.28; 'problem': 0.28; 'bound': 0.29; 'do.': 0.30; 'operations': 0.30; 'operation.': 0.30; 'implement': 0.32; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.33; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.34; 'integer': 0.34; 'languages.': 0.34; 'shorter': 0.34; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.35; 'reference': 0.35; 'object': 0.35; 'cheap': 0.37; 'several': 0.37; 'but': 0.37; 'something': 0.37; 'two': 0.37; 'think': 0.38; 'received:org': 0.38; 'subject:: ': 0.39; 'e.g.': 0.39; 'expensive': 0.39; 'header:Mime-Version:1': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'subject: (': 0.39; "it's": 0.40; 'easily': 0.61; 'your': 0.61; 'ever': 0.65; 'here.': 0.66; 'high': 0.67; 'subject:+': 0.73; 'low': 0.73; 'gain': 0.74; 'schrieb': 0.84 |
| X-Injected-Via-Gmane | http://gmane.org/ |
| To | python-list@python.org |
| From | Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de> |
| Subject | Re: relative speed of incremention syntaxes (or "i=i+1" VS "i+=1") |
| Date | Mon, 22 Aug 2011 04:04:08 +0200 |
| 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> |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 8bit |
| X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host | f049204197.adsl.alicedsl.de |
| User-Agent | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Lightning/1.0b2.102ipre2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 |
| In-Reply-To | <1313969134.3135.21.camel@thegeorge> |
| X-Enigmail-Version | 1.1.2 |
| OpenPGP | id=AD16AB1B; url=http://cheimes.de/heimes.asc |
| 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.295.1313978662.27778.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
| Lines | 25 |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 2001:888:2000:d::a6 |
| X-Trace | 1313978662 news.xs4all.nl 23919 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:47306 |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@xs4all.nl |
| Xref | x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:11983 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Am 22.08.2011 01:25, schrieb Andreas Löscher: > It's not as bad as you think. The addition of two integers is a cheap > task (in terms of computation power). If you have two way's to to it, > every little think (jumps in the code etc. ) will have a larger impact > on the execution time than on an expensive operation. > > 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. :-) You can learn an important lesson here. Since Python is a high level language without a JIT (yet) integer operations are much slower than in C or other low level languages. In general it's not a problem for most people. However if your algorithm is speed bound to integer operations or has a tight inner for loop than you can gain a considerable amount of speedup with C code. Reference counting and Python object creation need several CPU cycles. Also a good algorithm and a modern C compiler can make use of SIMD instructions, too. If you ever feel the need to implement something fast e.g. an encryption algorithm then you'd better off with a C implementation. Cython is my favourite tool for the job. Christian
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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