"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> Of course that statement is also false. Performance prediction is very
> difficult, and you cannot imply much from this benchmark. In other
[...]
s/imply/infer/
John
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
John J. Lee wrote:
> Duncan Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [...]
>>str.join(sep, list_of_str)
> [...]
>
> Doesn't work with unicode, IIRC.
>
>
str.join won't work if sep is unicode, but generally you know what type the
separator is and str.join will quite happily join a list of string
Dan Bishop wrote:
John J. Lee wrote:
Doesn't work with unicode, IIRC.
u" ".join(["What's", "the", "problem?"])
u"What's the problem?"
str.join(x, y) isn't quite a drop-in replacement for
string.join(y, x), since it's not polymorphic on the
joining string:
>>> str.join(u" ", ["a", "b"])
Traceback (
John J. Lee wrote:
> Duncan Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [...]
> >str.join(sep, list_of_str)
> [...]
>
> Doesn't work with unicode, IIRC.
>>> u" ".join(["What's", "the", "problem?"])
u"What's the problem?"
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Out of curiosity: when thinking about Python 3.0, what is the timespan
> in which you expect that to appear? Before 2010? After 2010? After 2020?
I'm not terribly worried about Python 3.0 incompatibilities, whenever
those are. There are already thre
Andreas Beyer wrote:
If I am getting the docs etc. correctly, the string-module is depricated
and is supposed to be removed with the release of Python 3.0.
I still use the module a lot and there are situations in which I don't
know what to do without it. Maybe you can give me some help.
Out of cu
Andreas Beyer wrote:
Yeeh, I was expecting something like that. The only reason to use map()
at all is for improving the performance.
That is lost when using list comprehensions (as far as I know). So, this
is *no* option for larger jobs.
Don't believe anything you hear right away, especially not
Duncan Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
>str.join(sep, list_of_str)
[...]
Doesn't work with unicode, IIRC.
John
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Andreas Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK, you won. I read in an (regretably old) guidline for improving
> Python's performance that you should prefer map() compared to list
> comprehensions. Apparently the performance of list comprehensions has
> improved a lot, which is great. (Or the overh
Ivan Van Laningham wrote:
Tim Peters sayeth, "Premature Optimization is the Root of All Evil."
And he is not kidding.
And just to forestall another long thread about who
actually said that originally, it was really Mark
Twain, quoting Churchill. Tim just added a .
-Peter
--
http://mail.python.org
Hi All--
Michael Chermside wrote:
>
> The REAL lesson here is that you shouldn't follow any "optimization"
> rules without actually testing them. If you don't have time to test,
> then just don't optimize... write whatever is most readable. If you
> NEED more speed, then profiling and testing wil
OK, you won. I read in an (regretably old) guidline for improving
Python's performance that you should prefer map() compared to list
comprehensions. Apparently the performance of list comprehensions has
improved a lot, which is great. (Or the overhead of calling map() got
too big, but I hope th
Andreas Beyer wrote:
> I loved to use
> >>> string.join(list_of_str, sep)
> instead of
> >>> sep.join(list_of_str)
>
> I think the former is much more telling what is happening than the
> latter. However, I will get used to it.
No need to get used to it. Just reverse the order of the arguments
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 08:32:20PM -0800, Andreas Beyer wrote:
> Hi:
>
> If I am getting the docs etc. correctly, the string-module is depricated
> and is supposed to be removed with the release of Python 3.0.
> I still use the module a lot and there are situations in which I don't
> know what t
"Delaney, Timothy C (Timothy)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Andreas Beyer wrote:
>
>> Yeeh, I was expecting something like that. The only reason to use
>> map() at all is for improving the performance.
>> That is lost when using list comprehensions (as far as I know). So,
>> this is *no* option f
Andreas> Yeeh, I was expecting something like that. The only reason to
Andreas> use map() at all is for improving the performance. That is
Andreas> lost when using list comprehensions (as far as I know). So,
Andreas> this is *no* option for larger jobs.
Did you test your hypothes
Hey Andreas,
> I loved to use
> >>> string.join(list_of_str, sep)
> instead of
> >>> sep.join(list_of_str)
>
> I think the former is much more telling what is happening than the
> latter. However, I will get used to it.
I find that binding a name to the separator makes it more readable
(YMMV):
Andreas Beyer wrote:
> Yeeh, I was expecting something like that. The only reason to use
> map() at all is for improving the performance.
> That is lost when using list comprehensions (as far as I know). So,
> this is *no* option for larger jobs.
Try it and see. You'll probably be pleasantly surp
Hi All--
Andreas Beyer wrote:
>
> I loved to use
> >>> string.join(list_of_str, sep)
> instead of
> >>> sep.join(list_of_str)
>
> I think the former is much more telling what is happening than the
> latter. However, I will get used to it.
>
I disagree, but maybe you could think of it as a mu
Yeeh, I was expecting something like that. The only reason to use map()
at all is for improving the performance.
That is lost when using list comprehensions (as far as I know). So, this
is *no* option for larger jobs.
Andreas
Skip Montanaro wrote:
>>> upper_list = map(string.upper, list_of_st
>>> upper_list = map(string.upper, list_of_str)
Andreas> What am I supposed to do instead?
Try
[s.upper() for s in list_of_str]
Skip
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
21 matches
Mail list logo
