Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1.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 0.007 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'from:addr:yahoo.co.uk': 0.04; 'lawrence': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'language.': 0.14; 'all?': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'slice,': 0.16; 'subject:bit': 0.16; 'sure.': 0.16; 'index': 0.16; 'language': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'seems': 0.21; 'header:User- Agent:1': 0.23; "haven't": 0.24; '---': 0.24; 'header:X -Complaints-To:1': 0.27; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'character': 0.29; 'fastest': 0.30; 'code': 0.31; 'extract': 0.31; 'run': 0.32; 'but': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'doing': 0.36; 'to:addr :python-list': 0.38; 'that,': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:org': 0.40; 'problems.': 0.60; 'free': 0.61; 'viruses': 0.61; "you're": 0.61; 'further': 0.61; "you've": 0.63; 'email addr:gmail.com': 0.63; 'protection': 0.63; 'our': 0.64; 'antivirus': 0.68 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: Mark Lawrence Subject: Re: A curious bit of code... Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 19:09:56 +0000 References: <4cc09129-43ee-4205-a24c-03f92b594abc@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-78-146-8-178.as13285.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 In-Reply-To: <4cc09129-43ee-4205-a24c-03f92b594abc@googlegroups.com> X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 140213-0, 13/02/2014), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list 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: 34 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1392318616 news.xs4all.nl 2943 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:39270 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:66205 On 13/02/2014 18:37, forman.simon@gmail.com wrote: > I ran across this and I thought there must be a better way of doing it, but then after further consideration I wasn't so sure. > > if key[:1] + key[-1:] == '<>': ... > > > Some possibilities that occurred to me: > > if key.startswith('<') and key.endswith('>'): ... > > and: > > if (key[:1], key[-1:]) == ('<', '>'): ... > > > I haven't run these through a profiler yet, but it seems like the original might be the fastest after all? > All I can say is that if you're worried about the speed of a single line of code like the above then you've got problems. Having said that, I suspect that using an index to extract a single character has to be faster than using a slice, but I haven't run these through a profiler yet :) -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com