George Sakkis wrote: > On Mar 30, 9:03 am, Peter Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> > On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 01:27:18 -0300, Gabriel Genellina wrote: >> >> >> Second try: >> > ... >> >> Horrible, I know. Those wrapper1,wrapper2,wrapper3... keep growing >> >> with each call. But it's the only way I could find, at least without >> >> changing the code template used by timeit. >> >> > Eeek. Talk about namespace pollution. >> >> > Thanks for the effort, but if that's the only solution, I think the >> > solution is worse than the problem! >> >> > Perhaps it's time for me to take a different approach. >> >> [snip] >> >> Maybe the following enhancement of timeit would be worthwhile? > > [snip] > > > That would be great. I sometimes avoid timeit altogether because > setting up the environment is so cumbersome. Can you post the patch to > bugs.python.org so it doesn't get lost ?
Looking into http://svn.python.org/view/python/trunk/Lib/timeit.py?rev=54953&view=markup I discovered that the Python developers took a different approach and timeit now allows callables for setup and statement: >>> def f(): print 42 ... >>> timeit.Timer(f).repeat(1, 1) 42 [3.3855438232421875e-05] So my patch is probably a case of instant obsolescence... Peter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
