Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #377114
| From | deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children |
| Date | 2016-10-21 08:53 +0000 |
| Organization | O.W.L. |
| Message-ID | <ahjgud092.agx3@rooftop.invalid> (permalink) |
| References | <nt5rdf$35m$2@dont-email.me> <nt6ah6024gd@news3.newsguy.com> <nuanc6$909$2@dont-email.me> |
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
> On 10/6/2016 4:00 PM, Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks wrote:
>
>
>> Furthermore, the dumb fuck is actually manipulating strings,
>> which always is a computationally very expensive undertaking.
>
>
> My original code executed the join() string operation once for each word
> in the input (78), plus once per line of screen output (8 more), for a
> total of 86 per run. Sounds like a lot.
>
> So I wrote a new routine that eliminated all but the 8 join() outputs to
> screen. It keeps a running total of the length of words (elements in
> the list), and when that total meets or exceeds the block size, it
> join()s the applicable elements and writes the line to screen.
>
> Basically:
> * original code join()s strings then evaluates length.
> * new code evaluates lengths of the strings then does join().
>
> The output of the two is identical.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> import sys,time
>
> def split_ORIG(t,n,m):
> w=str(t).split()
> s,q=0,''
> if w[0][0]=='>':
> q=w[0]+' '
> w.pop(0)
> for e in range(1,len(w)-1):
> if w[e][-1:]=='.':w[e]+=' '
> if len(q)+len(' '.join(w[s:e+1]))>=m:
> #print n,q+' '.join(w[s:e])
> n+=1; s=e
> #print n,q+' '.join(w[s:len(w)])
>
>
> def split_NEW(t,n,m):
> w=str(t).split()
> s,q,z=0,'',0
> if w[0][0]=='>':
> q=w[0]+' '
> w.pop(0)
> for e in range(1,len(w)-1):
> if w[e][-1:]=='.':w[e]+=' '
> for i in range(s,e+2):
> z+=(len(w[i])+1)
> if len(q)+z>m:
> #print n,q+' '.join(w[s:e+1])
> n+=1;s=e+1
> z=0
> #print n,q+' '.join(w[s:len(w)])
>
>
>
> txt = "> Intel doesn't have to write a kernel from scratch. Nor does
> Android. They can use Linux. And if they need to make modifications for
> their own benefit, that's fine, just share that back. They benefited by
> not having to develop from scratch. But they need to give something back
> in return. Like the work they added. Both parties are give and take
> something from each other. I'll take that over the BSD license any day
> of the week."
>
> loops = int(sys.argv[1])
>
> n,b=1,60
>
> startTime = time.clock()
> for j in range(loops): split_ORIG(txt,n,b)
> endTime = time.clock()
> print "ORIG : %.2g seconds" % (endTime-startTime)
>
> startTime = time.clock()
> for j in range(loops): split_NEW(txt,n,b)
> endTime = time.clock()
> print "NEW : %.2g seconds" % (endTime-startTime)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> $ python splitlength.py 1000
> ORIG : 0.19 seconds
> NEW : 0.38 seconds
>
>
> I told your dumb ass before: python list operations are slow.
>
> Having to walk a list and check the size of each element is much slower
> than joining the elements and checking the size of the join()ed string.
>
> Got it, moron?
>
> As you like to say: "Don't post unless you know EXACTLY what you're
> talking about".
>
> So to all you blabbermouths named Feeb Russell, we can only say:
>
> FAHCK YOU!! FAHCK YOU!!
>
python pwned by C.
anon@lowtide:~/code/blah$ rm out
anon@lowtide:~/code/blah$ time ./bah 15 40 1000 >out
real 0m0.018s
user 0m0.012s
sys 0m0.004s
anon@lowtide:~/code/blah$ wc -l out
13000 out
anon@lowtide:~/code/blah$ head -n 20 out
15 > Intel doesn't have to write a kernel from
16 > scratch. Nor does Android. They can use
17 > Linux. And if they need to make
18 > modifications for their own benefit,
19 > that's fine, just share that back. They
20 > benefited by not having to develop from
21 > scratch. But they need to give something
22 > back in return. Like the work they
23 > added. Both parties are give and take
24 > something from each other. I'll take
25 > that over the BSD license any day of the
26 > week.
15 > Intel doesn't have to write a kernel from
16 > scratch. Nor does Android. They can use
17 > Linux. And if they need to make
18 > modifications for their own benefit,
19 > that's fine, just share that back. They
20 > benefited by not having to develop from
21 > scratch. But they need to give something
anon@lowtide:~/code/blah$
Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-06 11:42 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-10-06 20:00 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-06 19:31 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-07 00:20 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-06 20:55 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-07 01:04 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-06 22:11 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-07 02:19 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-06 23:20 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-07 03:33 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-07 00:02 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-07 04:22 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children fr314159@gmail.com - 2016-10-07 08:08 -0700
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-07 10:42 -0500
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-08 03:13 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-08 03:19 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-08 05:37 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 07:09 -0500
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-10 14:11 +0200
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 07:37 -0500
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-10 16:56 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-08 10:26 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-08 10:48 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 07:58 -0700
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-08 15:04 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-09 10:24 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-08 15:28 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-08 15:41 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-08 19:57 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-08 17:23 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-08 10:24 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-08 10:44 -0600
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-08 17:11 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-08 13:46 -0600
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-08 20:01 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 23:23 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-08 20:43 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-09 01:15 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-09 01:13 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-10-09 02:08 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-09 02:13 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-09 08:15 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 07:27 -0500
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 23:22 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-08 22:54 -0600
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-09 15:13 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-09 18:14 +0200
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-09 16:19 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-09 18:25 +0200
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 07:21 -0500
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-10 10:50 -0600
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-11-01 10:09 -0700
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-10-09 22:29 +0100
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-10-09 13:38 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-09 23:58 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 07:29 -0500
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-10-10 13:41 +0100
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 12:25 -0500
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-10 13:33 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-10 10:51 -0600
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-10-10 12:45 -0500
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-10 16:35 -0600
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Silver Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-10-10 18:54 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-10 21:56 -0600
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-10 22:48 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Jim Polaski <jpolaski@linuxmail.org> - 2016-10-11 00:02 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-10 21:58 -0600
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children GreyCloud <Cumulus@mist.com> - 2016-10-10 21:58 -0600
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-07 17:56 +0200
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-07 13:25 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Adlbifhr Mjduhgfks <am@random.us> - 2016-10-08 00:12 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-08 10:40 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-10 13:34 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-07 04:15 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-10-07 16:37 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-10-07 20:34 +0200
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 11:10 -0700
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-20 11:20 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-21 08:53 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-21 13:19 +0200
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-21 10:45 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-22 01:06 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Melzzzzz <Melzzzzz@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-22 02:15 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-22 02:40 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-22 05:00 +0200
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-22 16:34 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-22 23:14 +0200
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-10-22 18:24 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-25 23:20 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-26 05:22 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-26 11:26 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-26 20:42 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-10-27 01:45 +0200
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-27 01:21 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-22 09:33 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children deplorable owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-10-22 16:50 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children "Octavian W. Lagrange" <olagrang@perch.invalid> - 2016-10-06 21:25 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-10-07 16:30 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 09:44 -0700
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-10-07 17:20 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-07 15:24 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-10-07 20:01 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-07 16:50 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-10-07 21:37 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-07 17:54 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-10-07 22:11 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-10-07 13:51 -0400
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-10-07 18:13 +0000
Re: Ping sbd: another programming challenge for your developmentally challenged children Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-10-07 11:10 -0700
csiph-web