Duncan Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I went through your example to get timings for my machine, and I
ran into an issue I didn't expect.
My bat file did the following 10 times in a row:
(the command line wraps in this post)
call timeit -s "s='abracadabra1'*1000;t='abracadabra2';
startswith=s.startswith" startswith(t)
... giving me these times:
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.483 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.49 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.489 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.491 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.488 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.492 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.49 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.493 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.486 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.489 usec per loop
Then I thought that a shorter name for the lookup might affect the
timings, so I changed the bat file, which now did the following 10
times in a row:
timeit -s "s='abracadabra1'* 1000;t='abracadabra2';
sw=s.startswith" sw(t)
... giving me these times:
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.516 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.512 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.514 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.517 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.515 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.518 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.523 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.513 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.514 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.515 usec per loop
In other words, the shorter name did seem to affect the timings,
but in a negative way. Why it would actually change at all is
beyond me, but it is consistently this way on my machine.
Can anyone explain this?
--
rzed
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
