On 2005-06-12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Fascinating. With small strings, it uses the same object, and with > small numbers like 3. With 300 they were different objects (why,
It's purely an implimentation detail. The small integers get used a lot, so Python keeps a pre-created set of small integers handy. It would be a bit, uh, wasteful to pre-create all of possible integer objects, so "large" integers get created on the fly without checking to see if there are any existing ones with the right value. Large integers could get cached and re-used, but that would be extra overhead with little chance for benefit. > shouldn't they both be ints still?) They are. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! .. over in west at Philadelphia a puppy is visi.com vomiting... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list