[Python-Dev] proposal: add basic time type to the standard library
Tue, 26 Feb 2002 21:20:56 +0100
Jim Fulton wrote:
> "M.-A. Lemburg" wrote:
> > Jim Fulton wrote:
> > > What is data roundtrip safety?
> > Roundtrip safety means that e.g. if you take a COM date value
> > from a ADO and create a DateTime object with it, you can
> > be sure to get back the exact same value via the COMDate()
> > method.
> Since I don't know what COMDate is, this doesn't mean
> anything to me. :)
Then you're lucky -- COMDates are just about the strangest
beast I've ever seen as date/time encoding.
> > I suppose that I could easily make a few calculation
> > lazy to enhance speed; memory footprint would not change
> > though. It's currently at 56 bytes per DateTime object
> > and 36 bytes per DateTimeDelta object.
> Does that include the two words of Python object overhead?
I suppose so -- the values I quoted are the tp_size
values of the types. The instance will probably also require
a dictionary and the weak ref list on top of those figures.
> > To get similar accuracy in Python,
> I assume you mean precision.
> > you'd need a float and
> > an integer per object,
> It depends on the desired precision. To get minute
> precision, an int will do. Two ints can get you about
> a hundreth of a microsecond precision, which is more than
> most people need.
I was just trying to compare apples to apples :-)
mxDateTime offers the same precision as a float (for daytime)
and an integer (for the day) can give.
> > that's 16 bytes + 12 bytes == 28 bytes
> > + malloc() overhead for the two and the wrapping instance
> > which gives another 32 bytes (provided you store the two
> > objects in slots)... >60 bytes per Python based date time
> > object.
> A Python-based date-time object isn't very interesting to me.
You should have mentioned that earlier ;-)
CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH
Company & Consulting: http://www.egenix.com/
Python Software: http://www.egenix.com/files/python/