A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-July/026470.html below:

[Python-Dev] Single- vs. Multi-pass iterability

[Python-Dev] Single- vs. Multi-pass iterability [Python-Dev] Single- vs. Multi-pass iterabilityTim Peters tim.one@comcast.net
Sun, 14 Jul 2002 00:44:16 -0400
[David Abrahams]
> Yep, I know about PySequence_Fast(), annd we're currently using that.
> However I have a bunch of numerics users who will undoubtedly be working
> with some kind of array from NumPy or something -- they'll be really
> unimpressed with me when PySequence_Fast() copies their huge multi-pass
> sequence without individual Python objects for the elements into a tuple
> with each double expressed as a separate Python float.

Now that you have a concrete use case (to the extent that "some kind of
NumPy array or something" can be called concrete <wink>), have you talked to
the NumPy people about it?  They're very clever about making things run fast
(that's the reason for NumPy's existence), and they may want a different
approach entirely.

averse-to-generalizing-from-0-examples-ly y'rs  - tim





RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4