"Nicholas Bastin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Yeah, my point was mostly an aside to anyone that might have | questioned my earlier results of a 2.3x slowdown on integer-sized | values because I used 1. A quick switch to 200 netted the exact same | results,
Currently, 200 is a small, cached int just as 1 is ([-10,256] or so is range). | and a more extensive refactoring to get the same number of | operations on a random set of larger numbers netted the same result as | well better test tjr _______________________________________________ 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
