Re: Time for the yearly list.append() panic
29 May
2001
29 May
'01
3:54 p.m.
FYI, I checked in a variation (listobject.c) over the weekend. Win9x is ultimately hopeless, but we can grow a list there to about 35M elements now instead of crapping out at < 2M, and it's zippy the whole way until death. Win2K (and I *assume* WinNT) benefit much more, as non-linear behavior was obvious very early there. Now it's flat and fast until physical RAM is exhausted, and then it suffers looong (15-30 seconds) "hiccups" at resize points. Fred kindly confirmed that Linux isn't hurt. Its behavior looks the same as the new Win2K behavior, except that the Linux hiccups are much briefer (although still obvious when they occur). time-for-the-yearly-list.append()-celebration-ly y'rs - tim
8367
Age (days ago)
8367
Last active (days ago)
0 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
Tim Peters