Algorithms Library - Asking for Pointers

Travis Parks jehugaleahsa at gmail.com
Sun Sep 4 05:35:24 CEST 2011


On Sep 3, 12:35 am, Chris Torek <nos... at torek.net> wrote:
> In article <18fe4afd-569b-4580-a629-50f6c7482... at c29g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
> Travis Parks  <jehugalea... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >[Someone] commented that the itertools algorithms will perform
> >faster than the hand-written ones. Are these algorithms optimized
> >internally?
>
> They are written in C, so avoid a lot of CPython interpreter
> overhead.  Mileage in Jython, etc., may vary...
> --
> In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Wind River Systems
> Intel require I note that my opinions are not those of WRS or Intel
> Salt Lake City, UT, USA (40°39.22'N, 111°50.29'W)  +1 801 277 2603
> email: gmail (figure it out)      http://web.torek.net/torek/index.html

I thought I would point out that many of the itertools functions
change between 2.x and 3.x versions. Since 2.7 is supposed to be the
last 2.x language, I suppose I will wait until 3.2 becomes the norm
before I incorporate some of these changes. In the mean time, I will
starting working on algorithms that work against Sequences.

I think a really important lesson is that Python really doesn't need
an algorithms library, like many others do. A lot of the common
algorithms are supported by the syntax itself. All my library did was
allow for easier function composition.



More information about the Python-list mailing list