Re: Nested loops is strangely slow, totally at a loss.

References	<20141210052025.GA84184@FuzzyHorror> <CAPTjJmrM_nrGhPn2Le7b0iDOL5V035SOE3kVg98_89dVjueynA@mail.gmail.com> <CALwzid=vEcxcyxSN+8jXgC0VNKFBKNz5vZF+MrD7maGh0ECGAg@mail.gmail.com> <m68vqn$74v$1@ger.gmane.org> <CALwzid=EL8-CyQnkebL5nQeNb5nDNzZGBWE1TMPdvaTiERt1nw@mail.gmail.com>
From	Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Date	2014-12-10 09:07 -0700
Subject	Re: Nested loops is strangely slow, totally at a loss.
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.16812.1418227676.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> wrote:
> This also seems perfectly natural:
>
> def len(iterable):
>     return sum(1 for item in iterable)
>
> My observation is that seems strange to me that one standard sequence
operation should be supported for arbitrary iterators and the other not.
>
> If the objection about `len(count())` is that the call would never
return, I'll point out that `-42 in count()` suffers the same problem.

To further clarify what I'm saying, I don't think that len(iterable) should
be supported. I'm just dismayed that "x in iterable" already is.

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Nested loops is strangely slow, totally at a loss. Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-12-10 09:07 -0700

csiph-web