> Here is my attempt to convert the C code, not written with speed in mind
> and I was too lazy too time it. :-)
>
> from itertools import izip
>
> def pi():
> result = list()
> d = 0
> e = 0
> f = [2000] * 2801
> for c in xrange(2800, 0, -14):
> for b, g in izip(xrang
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael M. wrote:
> * The C is very fast, Python not.
> * Target: Do optimization, that Python runs nearly like C.
As someone else already asked: Why? You can't beat a compiled to machine
code language with an interpreted one when doing integer arithmetic.
> counter=c
>
Michael M. wrote:
> Ok, here is the code. It is a translation of the following code, found
> on the internet.
>
> * The C is very fast, Python not.
> * Target: Do optimization, that Python runs nearly like C.
There is an error in the translated code. It returns 1600 digits
instead of 800 digits.
On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 02:10:44 +0100, Michael M. wrote:
> print "\nTiming a 1 million loop 'for loop' ..."
> start = time.clock()
> for x in range(100):
>y = x # do something
Why not "pass # do nothing"?
> end = time.clock()
> print "Time elapsed = ", end - start, "seconds"
Are you awar
Michael M.:
> * The C is very fast, Python not.
> * Target: Do optimization, that Python runs nearly like C.
Python can't be fast as C for that kind of programs.
Note that your original C program gives less digits than the Python
program.
Your original takes about ~15.2 s on my PC. The following v
At Wednesday 3/1/2007 22:10, Michael M. wrote:
Ok, here is the code. It is a translation of the following code, found
on the internet.
* The C is very fast, Python not.
* Target: Do optimization, that Python runs nearly like C.
Why? Python is strong in other aspects, *not* on computation spee
Ok, here is the code. It is a translation of the following code, found
on the internet.
* The C is very fast, Python not.
* Target: Do optimization, that Python runs nearly like C.
Auf 800 Stellen in 160 Zeichen...
--
int a=1,b,c=2800,d,e,f[2801],g;main(){for(;b-c;)f[b++]=a/5;
for
