Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 00:44:14 -0700, alex23 wrote: > >> Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>> In other words, about 20% of the time he measures is the time taken to >>> print junk to the screen. >> >> Which makes his claim that "all the console outputs have been removed so >> that the benchmarking activity is not interfered with by the IO >> overheads" somewhat confusing...he didn't notice the output? Wrote it >> off as a weird Python side-effect? > > Wait... I've just remembered, and a quick test confirms... Python only > prints bare objects if you are running in a interactive shell. Otherwise > output of bare objects is suppressed unless you explicitly call print. > > Okay, I guess he is forgiven. False alarm, my bad. > > Well.. there must be somthing because this is what I got in a normal script execution:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] test]$ python iter.py Time per iteration = 357.467989922 microseconds [EMAIL PROTECTED] test]$ vim iter.py [EMAIL PROTECTED] test]$ python iter2.py Time per iteration = 320.306909084 microseconds [EMAIL PROTECTED] test]$ vim iter2.py [EMAIL PROTECTED] test]$ python iter2.py Time per iteration = 312.917997837 microseconds iter.py - Original script iter2.py - xrange instead of range iter2.py (2nd) - 't=' added -- Angel -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
