Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!xlned.com!feeder1.xlned.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.013 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.97; '*S*': 0.00; '(at': 0.04; 'insert': 0.05; 'subject:Python': 0.06; '---------': 0.07; 'correct.': 0.07; 'list?': 0.07; 'steve': 0.09; 'correct,': 0.09; 'lawrence': 0.09; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.11; 'python': 0.11; 'question.': 0.14; 'cares': 0.16; 'mark,': 0.16; 'pythonistas': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'seems': 0.21; '>>>': 0.22; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.22; 'header :User-Agent:1': 0.23; 'unicode': 0.24; 'cc:2**0': 0.24; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.24; 'second': 0.26; 'least': 0.26; 'subject:/': 0.26; 'primary': 0.26; 'asking': 0.27; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'point': 0.28; 'fixed': 0.29; 'chris': 0.29; 'character': 0.29; 'towards': 0.31; "d'aprano": 0.31; 'extending': 0.31; 'steven': 0.31; 'languages': 0.32; 'position.': 0.33; 'problem.': 0.35; 'requirement': 0.35; 'test': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'thanks': 0.36; 'performance': 0.37; 'message-id:@gmail.com': 0.38; 'initially': 0.38; 'whatever': 0.38; 'moving': 0.39; 'sure': 0.39; 'skip:u 10': 0.60; 'most': 0.60; 'times': 0.62; 'interest': 0.64; 'charset:windows-1252': 0.65; 'due': 0.66; 'header:Reply-To:1': 0.67; 'reply-to:no real name:2**0': 0.71; '100%': 0.77; 'reply- to:addr:gmail.com': 0.80; 'results,': 0.84; 'subject:long': 0.84; 'victim': 0.84; 'to:none': 0.92; 'outcome': 0.93; 'hundred': 0.95; '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:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=RdgD67myHWCfUNlnafZ5DshcGX5cGskG7taRKQ2XWcU=; b=LYG8J0gSAydSwtVKbCsDPUH2gDE3NAVDv1ZAyWhG0zJclx5CQ5RBXYUr+69j3JNnLM 1JDhicTlWYMHh+48Yzd84+PEbsmmqy8NnK3ydNwMJVrOW5mHx7L50/ylbtCaTnEqkiH+ 9hnHKGRTTUIes9uQvRWTLc0DCdeBTa561gjBmDFA35vZfBg6x+8FP6O43m8hebO0sZpn BmeDWFdS9nk8btyG5k8lIdUzr6P/dRYta5l98WabIYK9pBFPBD0sHCiQ3SDM+nrcI6br lqZBROoPL/0tk4qqRZXVDxUsgm39xhqNdfvy/Zwo0/3QLf2hYMXZD4a/DTQvTs9iYet6 nhUg== X-Received: by 10.180.92.229 with SMTP id cp5mr14754349wib.20.1364900299000; Tue, 02 Apr 2013 03:58:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 02 Apr 2013 11:58:11 +0100 From: Steve Simmons User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 References: <6a146aba-a032-4aac-b2d3-7acedcebd804@q3g2000pbv.googlegroups.com> <515941d8$0$29967$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5159beb6$0$29967$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <4103dc28-a0dc-4740-bb38-b6bcb58bedfb@h1g2000vbx.googlegroups.com> <515a9851$0$29891$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 40 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1364900300 news.xs4all.nl 6983 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:54787 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:42557 On 02/04/2013 10:43, Mark Lawrence wrote: > On 02/04/2013 10:24, jmfauth wrote: >> On 2 avr, 10:35, Steven D'Aprano > +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote: >>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 19:03:17 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: >>> >>> So what? Who cares if it takes 0.00002 second to insert a character >>> instead of 0.00001 second? That's still a hundred times faster than you >>> can type. >>> >> --------- >> >> This not the problem. The interesting point is that they >> are good and "less good" Unicode implementations. >> >> jmf >> > > The interesting point is that the Python 3.3 unicode implementation is > correct, that of most other languages is buggy. Or have I fallen > victim to the vicious propaganda of the various Pythonistas who > frequent this list? > Mark, Thanks for asking this question. 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. However, as you rightly point out, there is only value in following this through if the functionality is (at least near) 100% correct. I am sure there are some that will disagree but in most cases, functionality is the primary requirement and poor performance can be managed initially and fixed in due time. Steve