improving a huge double-for cycle

pruebauno at pruebauno at
Fri Sep 19 19:25:41 CEST 2008

On Sep 18, 7:42 pm, Steven D'Aprano <st... at REMOVE-THIS-> wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 20:43:00 +0200, Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
> > Now the obvious winner is pruebono - even unoptimized, using sets seems
> > to be *way* faster than even the most optimized corrected version of
> > your algorithm.
> I'm not being snarky about losing priority here, but I submitted
> essentially the same solution two hours earlier than pruebono.
> Are people not seeing my posts? Have I been kill-filed by everyone except
> Mensator? I also asked a question about HTTPError and I haven't seen any
> responses at all.
> --
> Steven

I see your post now, but I didn't notice it at the time I posted.
Could be because I am using the noticeable bad Google groups interface
that is known for being unreliable. Duplicate solutions on Usenet are
almost a given and I consider duplicate solutions a good thing, it
means that other people will be able to understand that code.

In any case I am not here for glory I am posting under a pseudonym so
nobody discovers that I am slacking off at work reading Usen[carrier

More information about the Python-list mailing list