Steven D'Aprano added the comment:
I cannot replicate that performance difference under Linux. There's a small
difference (about 0.1 second per million iterations, or a tenth of a
microsecond) on my computer, but I don't think that's meaningful:
py> from timeit import Timer
py> t1 = Timer('"{0},".format(999)')
py> t2 = Timer('"\'{0}\',".format(999)')
py> min(t1.repeat())
4.671058462932706
py> min(t2.repeat())
4.774653751403093
Please re-run your tests using the timeit module, and see if you can still see
a consistent difference with and without single quotes. Perhaps this is
specific to Windows?
Otherwise, I can only suggest that the timing difference is unrelated to the
difference in quotes in the script. Are you sure that this is absolutely the
only change between the run that took one minute and the run that took 30
minutes? No other changes to the script, running on the same data file, on the
same disk, no difference in what other processes are running? (E.g. if one run
is fighting for disk access with, say, a memory-hungry anti-virus scan, that
would easily explain the difference.)
----------
nosy: +steven.daprano
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue26118>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
