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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-November/146786.html below:

[Python-Dev] Implementing (parts of) copy module in C

• Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Implementing (parts of) copy module in C
• Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Benchmarking Python and micro-optimizations
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hi,

2016-11-01 22:56 GMT+01:00 Rasmus Villemoes <rv at rasmusvillemoes.dk>:
> I'm using (and contributing to) an application which spends a
> significant part of its startup time calling copy.deepcopy, so I thought
> I'd try to write a C extension to speed this up.

Maybe you should consider another option: using copy.dpeecopy() is
*bad* practice and should be avoided in almost all cases.

By design, copy.deepcopy() cannot be efficient.

For efficient code, you should redesign the application to use
immutable structures for example.

Victor

• Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Implementing (parts of) copy module in C
• Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Benchmarking Python and micro-optimizations
• 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