Hello, On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 23:20:28 -0400 David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
I have myself been "guilty" of using the problem style for N < 10. In fact, I had forgotten about the optimization even, since my uses are negligible time.
I personally don't think it's a "problem style" per se. I'm using it all the time. I'm going to keep using it. We all love Python for being a language which you can easily prototype in, and don't have to concern yourself with implementation details unless you want. My concern for Python to be a language which can be progressively and easily optimized when you need it. Going over the code and changing many lines along the lines of diff: - buf += piece + buf.append(piece) isn't my idea of "seamless" optimization, especially that I know it guaranteedly will grow my memory usage. Sadly I came to conclusion that even - buf += piece + buf.write(piece) patching hurts my aesthetic feelings. At least, that's the only explanation I have for why in one of my modules https://github.com/pfalcon/pycopy-lib/blob/master/utokenize/utokenize.py#L44 I converted one loop from "str +=" to "StringIO.write()", but not another. I then tried to think what could help with that and having += on StringIO seemed to do the trick.
For stuff like this, it's fast no matter what:
for clause in query_clauses: sql += clause
Maybe I have a WHERE or two. Maybe an ORDER BY. Etc. But if I'm sure there won't be more than 6 such clauses to the query I'm building, so what? Or probably likewise with bits of a file path, or a URL with optional parameters, and a few other things.
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 11:15 PM David Mertz <mertz@gnosis.cx> wrote:
Does anyone know if any linters find and warn about the `string += word` in a loop pattern? It feels like a linter would be the place to do that. I don't think we could possibly make it an actual interpreter warning given borderline OK uses (or possibly even preferred ones). But a little nagging in tooling could draw attention.
[] -- Best regards, Paul mailto:pmiscml@gmail.com