On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 22:50:29 +0000, Wojtek Walczak wrote: > Dnia Thu, 14 Aug 2008 00:31:00 +0200, Fredrik Lundh napisa³(a): > >>>> if ch in my_string: >>>> my_string = my_string.replace(ch, "") >>>> >>>> on representative data. >>> >>> I don't have to, I can anticipate the results. >> >> Chances are that you're wrong. > > At the moment my average is about 0.75 of mistake per post on > comp.lang.python (please, bare with me ;-)). I strongly believe that the > statement I made above won't make this number rise. > > :)
Okay, is this going to be one of those things where, no matter what the benchmarks show, you say "I was right, I *did* anticipate the results. I just anticipated them correctly/incorrectly."? If so, you get an A+ in pedantry and F- in usefulness *wink* In full knowledge that Python is relatively hard to guess what is fast compared to what is slow, I'll make my guess of fastest to slowest: 1. repeated replace 2. repeated use of the form "if ch in my_string: my_string = my_string.replace(ch, "") 3. re.sub with literal replacement 4. re.sub with callback (lambda m: "") Results to follow. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
