I thought I would try out Python 3.3 beta 2.
This works well so far but I keep getting the message:
Exception KeyError: KeyError(6308,) infrom 'c:\\Program Files\\Python33\\lib\\threading.py'> ignored
after some of my python code completes.
Is this an issue worth reporting?
--
http:
"Chris Angelico" wrote in message
news:mailman.3222.1344856408.4697.python-l...@python.org...
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 8:36 PM, Blind Anagram wrote:
I thought I would try out Python 3.3 beta 2.
This works well so far but I keep getting the message:
Exception KeyError: KeyError
"Chris Angelico" wrote in message
news:mailman.3223.1344857956.4697.python-l...@python.org...
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Blind Anagram wrote:
Here is a fairly short bit of code which produces the exception:
for pre in ('12', '13', '14', '
"Steven D'Aprano" wrote in message
news:502f8a2a$0$29978$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com...
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 01:09:26 -0700, wxjmfauth wrote:
[...]
If you can consistently replicate a 100% to 1000% slowdown in string
handling, please report it as a performance bug:
http://bugs.python.or
wrote in message
news:5dfd1779-9442-4858-9161-8f1a06d56...@googlegroups.com...
Le dimanche 19 août 2012 19:03:34 UTC+2, Blind Anagram a écrit :
"Steven D'Aprano" wrote in message
news:502f8a2a$0$29978$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com...
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 01:09:26 -
"Dave Angel" wrote in message
news:mailman.3519.1345399574.4697.python-l...@python.org...
[...]
This is an average slowdown by a factor of close to 2.3 on 3.3 when
compared with 3.2.
Using your measurement numbers, I get an average of 1.95, not 2.3
Yes - you are right - m
I would be grateful for any advice people can offer on the fastest way
to count items in a sub-sequence of a large list.
I have a list of boolean values that can contain many hundreds of
millions of elements for which I want to count the number of True values
in a sub-sequence, one from the start
On 22/04/2013 13:51, Dave Angel wrote:
> On 04/22/2013 07:58 AM, Blind Anagram wrote:
>> I would be grateful for any advice people can offer on the fastest way
>> to count items in a sub-sequence of a large list.
>>
>> I have a list of boolean values that can contain m
On 22/04/2013 14:13, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 12:58:20 +0100, Blind Anagram wrote:
>
>> I would be grateful for any advice people can offer on the fastest way
>> to count items in a sub-sequence of a large list.
>>
>> I have a list of b
On 22/04/2013 16:14, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
> On 22 April 2013 15:15, Blind Anagram wrote:
>> On 22/04/2013 14:13, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 12:58:20 +0100, Blind Anagram wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would be grateful for any advice peopl
On 22/04/2013 17:06, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
> On 22 April 2013 16:50, Blind Anagram wrote:
>>>
>>> It would be very easy to subclass list and add this functionality in
>>> cython if you decide that you do need a builtin method.
> [snip]
>>
>> But
On 22/04/2013 18:48, Skip Montanaro wrote:
>> But I was really wondering if there was a simple solution that worked
>> without people having to add libraries to their basic Python installations.
>
> I think installing numpy is approximately
>
> pip install numpy
>
> assuming you have write a
On 22/04/2013 21:18, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
> On 22 April 2013 17:38, Blind Anagram wrote:
[snip]
> If my description is correct then I would definitely consider using a
> different algorithmic approach. The density of primes from 1 to 1
> billlion is about 5%. Storing the p
On 22/04/2013 22:03, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
> On 22 April 2013 21:18, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
>> On 22 April 2013 17:38, Blind Anagram wrote:
>>> On 22/04/2013 17:06, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't know what your application is but I would say t
On 23/04/2013 00:06, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
> On 22 April 2013 22:25, Blind Anagram wrote:
>> On 22/04/2013 21:18, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
>>> On 22 April 2013 17:38, Blind Anagram wrote:
>>
>> I also wondered whether I had missed any obvious way of avoiding the
>
On 23/04/2013 00:28, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 22:25:50 +0100, Blind Anagram wrote:
>
>> I have looked at solutions based on listing primes and here I have found
>> that they are very much slower than my existing solution when the sieve
>> is not
On 23/04/2013 02:47, Dave Angel wrote:
> On 04/22/2013 05:32 PM, Blind Anagram wrote:
>> On 22/04/2013 22:03, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
>>> On 22 April 2013 21:18, Oscar Benjamin
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 22 April 2013 17:38, Blind Anagram wrote:
>>
On 23/04/2013 00:01, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:15:19 +0100, Blind Anagram wrote:
>
>> But when using a sub-sequence, I do suffer a significant reduction in
>> speed for a count when compared with count on the full list. When the
>> list is sma
On 23/04/2013 12:08, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
> On 23 April 2013 08:05, Blind Anagram wrote:
>> On 23/04/2013 00:01, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:15:19 +0100, Blind Anagram wrote:
>>>
>>>> But when using a sub-sequence, I do suffer
On 23/04/2013 15:49, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 08:05:53 +0100, Blind Anagram wrote:
>
>> I did a lot of work comparing the overall performance of the sieve when
>> using either lists or arrays and I found that lists were a lot faster
>> for the maj
>>>
>>> And when the sieve is large?
>>
>> I don't know but since the majority use case is when the sieve is small,
>> it makes sense to choose a list.
>
> That's an odd comment given what you said at the start of this thread:
>
> Blind Anagra
On 23/04/2013 21:00, Terry Jan Reedy wrote:
> On 4/23/2013 12:57 PM, Blind Anagram wrote:
>
>> So, all I was doing in asking for advice was to check whether there is
>> an easy way of avoiding the slice copy,
>
> And there is.
>
>> not because this is critic
On 24/04/2013 02:59, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2013 17:57:17 +0100, Blind Anagram wrote:
[snip]
> In my opinion, it is more important to be efficient for large sieves, not
> small. As they say, for small N, everything is fast. Nobody is going to
> care abo
"Vicent Giner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry if my question was already asked and answered, but I can't
manage with this...
I've installed Python 2.6 in my Windows XP. Actually, I've installed
ActiveState's ActivePython 2.6.
I would like to use NumPy and SciP
"MRAB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Nov 19, 1:44 pm, John Machin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Nov 20, 12:35 am, srinivasan srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| >>> import math
| >>> num = 123.4567
| >>> math.modf(num)
| (0.456699789, 123.0)
def fra
25 matches
Mail list logo
