range question, compared to Smalltalk
BPettersen at NAREX.com
Wed Aug 28 17:25:22 CEST 2002
> From: Frank Buss [mailto:fb at frank-buss.de]
> Neal Norwitz <neal at metaslash.com> wrote:
> > Use xrange. But xrange only works on integer values defined by a C
> > long (usually 32 bits, but sometimes 64 bits).
> Thanks, that's what I was searching for. Because it is a
> builtin type it's
> faster than a solution with a normal Python class, I assume,
> and it should
> be used for loops ("for i in xrange(123):") every time,
> shouldn't it?
That, of course, depends <wink>. On my machine range is faster for lists
up to ~1500 items and comparable to xrange up to ~17000 items... Test
for count in xrange(sys.maxint):
rstart = time.clock()
for i in range(count):
rtime = time.clock() - rstart
xstart = time.clock()
for i in xrange(count):
xtime = time.clock() - xstart
if rtime < xtime:
winner = 'range'
winner = 'xrange'
print >> fp, '%8d %.3f %.3f %15s' % (count, rtime, xtime,
if __name__ == "__main__":
fp = None
if len(sys.argv) > 1:
fp = open(sys.argv, 'w')
More information about the Python-list