[Python-Dev] SIGCHECK() in longobject.c

Mark Dickinson dickinsm at gmail.com
Mon Oct 19 11:28:34 CEST 2009

On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> Sure, but it's no different than doing, e.g.:
>    list(range(100000000)).sort()
> (don't try this, it just made by computer slow down to a crawl and I had to kill
> -9 the Python interpreter)

Maybe you were running out of RAM?  On a 64-bit machine,
list(range(10**8)) takes over 3 Gb.

For me, x = list(range(10**8)) takes around 6 seconds, and then
x.sort() takes around 2 seconds.  This is on a machine with
16 Gb of RAM.  (Though I do seem to recall that timsort is
extra fast for already sorted lists: O(n) rather than O(n log n)?)

So I'd say that it *is* different.  A million digit integer takes less
than half a megabyte of RAM, so a single operation can be
horribly slow long before memory limitations are reached.

I'd prefer to keep the SIGCHECK unless there's a really
compelling advantage to getting rid of it.


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list