RetroSearch Browse

Fri Feb 18 09:18:31 CET 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-February/051652.html

Raymond Hettinger wrote:

> Based on some ideas from Skip, I had tried transforming the likes of "x
> in (1,2,3)" into "x in frozenset([1,2,3])".  When applicable, it
> substantially simplified the generated code and converted the O(n)
> lookup into an O(1) step.  There were substantial savings even if the
> set contained only a single entry.

savings in what?  time or bytecode size?  constructed micro-benchmarks,
or examples from real-life code?

do we have any statistics on real-life "n" values?

</F> 

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-February/051652.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: Prospective Peephole Transformation