On 4/23/07, Daniel Stutzbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 4/23/07, Mike Klaas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Might it be possible to include variance bars? > > I'm not really sure what variance bars would reveal. Performing > exactly the same operations follows exactly the same code path, so > there's not a lot of variance to be found. Let me explain my > methodology for generating these figures.
You;re right. I was interested in whether some of the jagged graphs were due to noise or underlying behaviour. On closer inspection it is clear that the jumps tend to happen near the same place on most ops (esp the first at ~128), which makes it clear that it is underlying behaviour. > > A few of the graphs > > show your data structure faster than the list even for small N, and it > > would be great to see if it is meaningfully faster in these cases (if > > so, perhaps there are optimization possibilities for the current list > > data structure). > > Yes, in some cases the optimizations I've made could be ported back to > the current list data structure. I will try to hunt these down and > send patches via SourceForge. The init-from iterable is especially interesting: a 20% speed increase for list comps is not to be scoffed at. Have you analyzed the memory consumption of the two data structures? -Mike _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
