Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #79426
| From | Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: (-1)**1000 |
| Date | 2014-10-22 12:29 +0200 |
| Organization | None |
| References | <54476a77$0$21664$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <mailman.15058.1413968065.18130.python-list@python.org> <5447786d$0$12750$426a74cc@news.free.fr> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.15063.1413973806.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
ast wrote: > > "Chris Angelico" <rosuav@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de > news:mailman.15058.1413968065.18130.python-list@python.org... >> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 7:27 PM, ast <nomail@invalid.com> wrote: >>> If i am writing (-1)**1000 on a python program, will the >>> interpreter do (-1)*(-1)*...*(-1) or something clever ? >>> >>> In fact i have (-1)**N with N an integer potentially big. >> >> Exponentiation is far more efficient than the naive implementation of >> iterated multiplication. > > In the very particular case of (-1)**N, I belive that Python check > the odd or even parity of N and provides the result accordingly. > > I tried: >>>> (-1)**1000000000000000000000000000000000 > 1 >>>> (-1)**1000000000000000000000000000000001 > -1 > > and it is instantaneous Not instantaneous once you defeat the peephole optimizer by introducing a variable: $ python3 -m timeit '(-1)**10000000000000000000000000000000001' 10000000 loops, best of 3: 0.0356 usec per loop $ python3 -m timeit -s'a = 10000000000000000000000000000000001' '(-1)**a' 100000 loops, best of 3: 3.23 usec per loop When you increase the exponent you might discern a pattern: $ python3 -m timeit -s 'a = 10**10' '(-1)**a' 1000000 loops, best of 3: 1.42 usec per loop $ python3 -m timeit -s 'a = 10**100' '(-1)**a' 100000 loops, best of 3: 11.6 usec per loop $ python3 -m timeit -s 'a = 10**1000' '(-1)**a' 10000 loops, best of 3: 101 usec per loop $ python3 -m timeit -s 'a = 10**10000' '(-1)**a' 1000 loops, best of 3: 992 usec per loop That looks like log(a) while a parity check takes constant time: $ python3 -m timeit -s 'a = 10**10' 'a & 1' 10000000 loops, best of 3: 0.124 usec per loop $ python3 -m timeit -s 'a = 10**100' 'a & 1' 10000000 loops, best of 3: 0.124 usec per loop $ python3 -m timeit -s 'a = 10**1000' 'a & 1' 10000000 loops, best of 3: 0.122 usec per loop
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
(-1)**1000 "ast" <nomail@invalid.com> - 2014-10-22 10:27 +0200
Re: (-1)**1000 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-10-22 19:54 +1100
Re: (-1)**1000 "ast" <nomail@invalid.com> - 2014-10-22 11:27 +0200
Re: (-1)**1000 Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2014-10-22 12:29 +0200
Re: (-1)**1000 Michiel Overtoom <motoom@xs4all.nl> - 2014-10-22 12:38 +0200
Re: (-1)**1000 Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2014-10-22 05:43 -0500
Re: (-1)**1000 Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2014-10-22 13:02 +0200
Re: (-1)**1000 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-10-22 08:23 -0600
Re: (-1)**1000 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-10-22 08:29 -0600
Re: (-1)**1000 Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-10-22 11:01 -0400
Re: (-1)**1000 wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-10-22 04:35 -0700
Re: (-1)**1000 Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2014-10-22 11:13 +0200
Re: (-1)**1000 Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-10-22 13:15 -0400
Re: (-1)**1000 Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-10-24 13:57 -0400
Re: (-1)**1000 Tony the Tiger <tony@tiger.invalid> - 2014-10-26 20:07 +0000
Re: (-1)**1000 Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-10-26 16:45 -0400
Re: (-1)**1000 Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2014-10-29 20:31 +0100
csiph-web