Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #102389 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Sven R. Kunze" <srkunze@mail.de> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-01 18:24 +0100 |
| Last post | 2016-02-01 18:24 +0100 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Heap Implementation "Sven R. Kunze" <srkunze@mail.de> - 2016-02-01 18:24 +0100
| From | "Sven R. Kunze" <srkunze@mail.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-01 18:24 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Heap Implementation |
| Message-ID | <mailman.4.1454347459.3032.python-list@python.org> |
On 31.01.2016 05:59, srinivas devaki wrote: > @Sven > actually you are not sweeping at all, as i remember from my last post > what i meant by sweeping is periodically deleting the elements which > were marked as popped items. Exactly. Maybe I didn't express myself well. Would you prefer the sweeping approach in terms of efficiency over how I implemented xheap currently? Without running some benchmarks, I have absolutely no feeling which approach is faster/more memory efficient etc. > kudos on that __setitem__ technique, > instead of using references to the items like in HeapDict, it is > brilliant of you to simply use __setitem__ Thanks. :) > On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 4:17 AM, Sven R. Kunze <srkunze@mail.de> wrote: >> Hi again, >> >> as the topic of the old thread actually was fully discussed, I dare to open >> a new one. >> >> I finally managed to finish my heap implementation. You can find it at >> https://pypi.python.org/pypi/xheap + https://github.com/srkunze/xheap. >> >> I described my motivations and design decisions at >> http://srkunze.blogspot.com/2016/01/fast-object-oriented-heap-implementation.html >> >> @Cem >> You've been worried about a C implementation. I can assure you that I did >> not intend to rewrite the incredibly fast and well-tested heapq >> implementation. I just re-used it. >> >> I would really be grateful for your feedback as you have first-hand >> experience with heaps. >> >> @srinivas >> You might want to have a look at the removal implementation. Do you think it >> would be wiser/faster to switch for the sweeping approach? >> >> I plan to publish some benchmarks to compare heapq and xheap. >> >> @all >> What's the best/standardized tool in Python to perform benchmarking? Right >> now, I use a self-made combo of unittest.TestCase and time.time + proper >> formatting. >> >> Best, >> Sven >> >> >> PS: fixing some weird typos and added missing part.
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web