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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-May/023897.html below:

[Python-Dev] Unicode objects more space efficient than plain strings? can that be?

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] Unicode objects more space efficient than plain strings? can that be?
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Unicode objects more space efficient than plain strings? can that be?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[Skip notices that the second below eats much more memory than the first:]
>     l = [u"abc%d"%i for i in xrange(1000000)]
>     l = ["abc%d"%i for i in xrange(1000000)]

Yup, I can confirm this on Linux with a recent 2.3 build.  A 2.2 build
works as expected though (plain strings take up less space).  One for
the PyMalloc/GC team, I'm afraid...  (Using a debug build and
PYTHONDUMPREFS=1, I see no leaked objects.)

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] Unicode objects more space efficient than plain strings? can that be?
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Unicode objects more space efficient than plain strings? can that be?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

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