Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> Sammo <sammo2828 <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>> String concatenation has been optimized since 2.3, so using += should
>> be fairly fast.
>
> This is implementation dependent and shouldn't be relied upon.
It's also a fairly simple optimization and really only applies to direct
object access, not items or attributes.
>>> Timer('s += "x"', 's = ""').repeat(number=100000)
[0.067316055297851562, 0.063985109329223633, 0.066659212112426758]
>>> Timer('s[0] += "x"', 's = [""]').repeat(number=100000)
[3.0495560169219971, 2.2938292026519775, 2.2914319038391113]
>>> Timer('s.s += "x"',
... 'class K(object): pass \ns=K();s.s = ""').repeat(number=100000)
[3.3624241352081299, 2.3346412181854248, 2.9846079349517822]
>> Note that I need to do something to mydata INSIDE the loop, so please
>> don't tell me to append moredata to a list and then use "".join after
>> the loop.
>
> Then why not just mutate the list and then call "".join?
Yes, there almost certainly is a way to avoid the repeated concatenation.
>> Why is the second test so much slower?
>
> Probably several reasons:
>
> 1. Function call overhead is quite large compared to these simple
> operations. 2. You are resolving attribute names.
3. Because the optimization isn't applied in this case.
--
Steven
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
