On Sunday 7 Jun 2015 19:23 CEST, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 3:17 AM, C.D. Reimer <ch...@cdreimer.com> wrote: >> This is the Python script that takes ~197 seconds to complete. >> >> import random, time >> >> startTime = time.time() >> >> f = [0] * 12 >> >> for i in range(50000000): >> >> a = random.randint(1,6) >> >> b = random.randint(1,6) >> >> f[(a + b) - 1] += 1 >> >> print "\nTOTAL SPOTS","\tNUMBER OF TIMES\n" >> >> for i in range(1,12): >> >> print ' ' + str(i + 1), '\t\t ', f[i] >> >> print '\n', time.time() - startTime > > Before you go any further, can you just try this script, please, and > see how long it takes to run? > > import random, time > startTime = time.time() > for i in range(50000000): > pass > print '\n', time.time() - startTime > > I know, seems a stupid thing to try, right? But you're using Python > 2, as evidenced by the print statements, and that means that range() > is constructing a 50M element list. It's entirely possible that > that's a significant part of your time - allocating all that memory, > populating it, and then disposing of it at the end (maybe). > > Maybe it'll turn out not to be significant, but there's only one way > to find out.
I tried this in 2 and 3. In 3 it takes 3.13 seconds and 2 7.5 seconds. A significant difference, but not in the whole of what he was trying to do I think. -- Cecil Westerhof Senior Software Engineer LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
