On 15 Sep 2006 08:16:41 -0700, John Machin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > C:\junk>python -mtimeit -s"BLACK=(0,0,0);rgb=(1,1,1)" "rgb==BLACK" > 1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.129 usec per loop > > C:\junk>python -mtimeit -s"rgb=(1,1,1)" "rgb==(0,0,0)" > 1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.127 usec per loop
Surprisingly (to me), hand splitting the tuple and doing short circuit comparisons is slightly faster than either of those: C:\Python25>python -mtimeit -s"BLACK=(0,0,0);rgb=(1,1,1)" "rgb==BLACK" 10000000 loops, best of 3: 0.18 usec per loop C:\Python25>python -mtimeit -s"rgb = (1,1,1)" "rgb == (0,0,0)" 10000000 loops, best of 3: 0.169 usec per loop C:\Python25>python -mtimeit -s"rgb = (1,1,1)" "rgb[0] == 0 and rgb[1] == 0 and rgb[2] == 0" 10000000 loops, best of 3: 0.158 usec per loop It probably has to do with not needing to find the len of the tuple each time you compare. I agree with Paul's earlier statement that there's probably a better way to do this through PIL. I've read through the PIL docs, but I'm afraid I'm running into problems caused by my own ignorance. It seems like I should be able to do something with Image.eval(), the point() method or one of the PIL filters, but I don't understand them well enough. I'll take a look through the source, and if that doesn't help I'll take this to the PIL list to get some further feedback on how those work. -- Jerry -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
