Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
From: Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Subject: Re: The Cost of Dynamism (was Re: Pyhon 2.x or 3.x, which is faster?)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 16:08:35 +0000
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <mailman.58.1458749369.2244.python-list@python.org>
References: <mailman.8.1457732171.12893.python-list@python.org> <nbvqg5$3cm$1@dont-email.me> <mailman.23.1457749230.12893.python-list@python.org> <56e44258$0$1598$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.46.1457819135.12893.python-list@python.org> <8737rvxs89.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <nc2a7s$6dv$1@dont-email.me> <mailman.48.1457831488.12893.python-list@python.org> <nc4ffn$f6s$1@dont-email.me> <56e7483d$0$1608$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <nc7kjr$jj8$1@dont-email.me> <ncnhp9$tt7$1@dont-email.me> <ncnip4$1pb$1@ger.gmane.org> <mailman.422.1458524141.12893.python-list@python.org> <ncnkma$d1i$1@dont-email.me> <mailman.425.1458526280.12893.python-list@python.org> <56ef9787$0$1516$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.433.1458546438.12893.python-list@python.org> <56f02196$0$1588$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.29.1458713374.2244.python-list@python.org> <nctrak$rbh$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de sSO8D7rRp27OQsLf1zUP0w2Lk7wd7ICAfr3JhCGDs4AQ==
Return-Path: <python-python-list@m.gmane.org>
X-Original-To: python-list@python.org
Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status: OK 0.000
X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'python,': 0.02; 'from:addr:yahoo.co.uk': 0.05; 'performs': 0.07; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'subject:which': 0.09; 'python.': 0.11; 'algorithm.': 0.16; 'badly.': 0.16; 'character).': 0.16; 'language)': 0.16; 'measuring': 0.16; 'received:194.126': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:io': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'received:psf.io': 0.16; 'subject:?)': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'string': 0.17; 'beginner': 0.18; 'differ': 0.18; 'duplicate': 0.18; '(in': 0.18; 'language': 0.19; 'library': 0.20; 'lawrence': 0.22; '(where': 0.23; 'header :In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'header:X -Complaints-To:1': 0.26; 'rest': 0.26; 'executing': 0.27; 'function': 0.28; "skip:' 10": 0.28; "i'm": 0.30; 'code': 0.30; 'everyone': 0.31; 'language.': 0.32; 'problem': 0.33; 'behind': 0.35; 'could': 0.35; 'done': 0.35; 'cases': 0.36; "wasn't": 0.36; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'received:org': 0.37; 'doing': 0.38; 'means': 0.39; 'goes': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'mark': 0.40; 'some': 0.40; 'subject:The': 0.61; 'received:194': 0.61; 'our': 0.64; 'here': 0.66; 'expresses': 0.84; 'pythonistas,': 0.84
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 248.80.126.194.pool.dsl.daisyplc.net
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0
In-Reply-To: <nctrak$rbh$1@dont-email.me>
X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://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: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:105559

On 23/03/2016 10:34, BartC wrote:
> On 23/03/2016 06:09, Ben Finney wrote:
>
>> The problem is that Bart simultaneously is a beginner at Python, and
>> expresses astonishment that everyone shrugs when Bart's
>> dreadfully-written code performs so badly.
>
> My interests differ from most people here writing Python.
>
> For example, I'm interested in byte-code (any byte-code) and what can be
> done with it. Investigating how well it performs in 'extreme' cases
> means executing algorithms predominantly in byte-code, not measuring how
> well some library function (in some unspecified language) can cope with
> the algorithm.
>
> And doing it 'Pythonically' can lead to suggestions such as the
> following the other day:
>
>   c, psource = psource[0], psource[1:]
>
> (where psource is a very long string), which even I could tell, from
> knowing what goes on behind the scenes, wasn't going to work well
> (duplicating the rest of the string roughly every other character).
>

It would work perfectly. How would it duplicate the rest of the string 
roughly every other character?

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence