On Sun, 01 Apr 2018 19:14:05 +, Arkadiusz Bulski wrote:
> Thanks,
> timeit gives `not any(key)` same performance as `sum(key)==0`.
Have you considered what happens when the key is *not* all zeroes?
key = b'\x11'*100
any(key) bails out on the first byte. sum(key) has to add a million
v
Arkadiusz Bulski wrote:
> Thanks,
> timeit gives `not any(key)` same performance as `sum(key)==0`.
Then you did not feed it the "right" data
$ python3 -m timeit -s 'key = b"x" + bytes(10**6)' 'sum(key)'
100 loops, best of 3: 15.7 msec per loop
$ python3 -m timeit -s 'key = b"x" + bytes(10**6)' '
On Mon, Apr 2, 2018 at 5:14 AM, Arkadiusz Bulski wrote:
> Thanks,
> timeit gives `not any(key)` same performance as `sum(key)==0`.
Are you timing these on ten-byte keys, or really large keys? For short
keys, just use whatever looks most elegant, and don't worry about
performance. If the key is ac
2018-04-01 22:03 GMT+03:00 Kirill Balunov :
>
>
> 2018-04-01 20:55 GMT+03:00 Arkadiusz Bulski :
>
>> What would be the most performance efficient way of checking if a bytes is
>> all zeros?
>
>
> Try `not any(key)` ;)
>
>
Sorry, I don't timed it before I posted. In reality, it is far from the
fast
Thanks,
timeit gives `not any(key)` same performance as `sum(key)==0`.
niedz., 1 kwi 2018 o 21:03 użytkownik Kirill Balunov <
kirillbalu...@gmail.com> napisał:
> 2018-04-01 20:55 GMT+03:00 Arkadiusz Bulski :
>
>> What would be the most performance efficient way of checking if a bytes is
>> all z
2018-04-01 20:55 GMT+03:00 Arkadiusz Bulski :
> What would be the most performance efficient way of checking if a bytes is
> all zeros?
Try `not any(key)` ;)
With kind regards,
-gdg
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 01/04/2018 18:55, Arkadiusz Bulski wrote:
What would be the most performance efficient way of checking if a bytes is
all zeros? Currently its `key == b'\x00' * len(key)` however, because its
Python 2/3 compatible:
That doesn't too efficient, if you first have to construct a compatible
objec
Arkadiusz Bulski wrote:
> What would be the most performance efficient way of checking if a bytes is
> all zeros? Currently its `key == b'\x00' * len(key)` however, because its
> Python 2/3 compatible:
>
> sum(key) == 0 is invalid
> key == bytes(len(key)) is invalid
>
> I already considered prec
On 2018-04-01 18:55, Arkadiusz Bulski wrote:
What would be the most performance efficient way of checking if a bytes is
all zeros? Currently its `key == b'\x00' * len(key)` however, because its
Python 2/3 compatible:
sum(key) == 0 is invalid
key == bytes(len(key)) is invalid
I already considere
Some interesting timeits:
In [7]: timeit('sum(x)==0', 'x=bytes(10)')
Out[7]: 0.30194770699927176
In [11]: timeit('x==bytes(10)', 'x=bytes(10)')
Out[11]: 0.2181608650007547
In [12]: timeit('x==z*10', 'x=bytes(10); z=bytes(1)')
Out[12]: 0.1092393600010837
In [13]: timeit('x==x2', 'x=bytes(10); z=
What would be the most performance efficient way of checking if a bytes is
all zeros? Currently its `key == b'\x00' * len(key)` however, because its
Python 2/3 compatible:
sum(key) == 0 is invalid
key == bytes(len(key)) is invalid
I already considered precomputing the rhs value.
Length of key is
11 matches
Mail list logo
