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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-August/081852.html below:

.format() is much slower than %

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] optimization required: .format() is much slower than %
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Should we help pythonmac.org?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Eric Smith <eric <at> trueblade.com> writes:
> 
> I finally backported this to 2.6 in r65814.  There's a similar 30% 
> speedup for the simplest cases.  Unicode optimization is worse than 
> string optimization, because of the way int, long, and float formatters 
> work.  This can be fixed, but I'm not sure the gain justifies the 
> effort.  I doubt I'll have time to look into this before beta3.

Given the choice, I would think it's more important to further speedup the 
implementation in 3.0 rather than try to backport the existing speedups to 2.6.
In 2.6 the standard formatting facility is still the % operator.

(Just my two suboptimal cents)

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] optimization required: .format() is much slower than %
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Should we help pythonmac.org?
• 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