Andrew Lin <onethreese...@gmail.com> added the comment:
Timings are unaffected by updating to non-walrus, so I'll do so in the PR. Using _randbelow_without_getrandbits() I get 5% improvement to sample([None] * 2047, 50); 6% to shuffle([None] * 2000); and approximately 6% to randrange() for any number significantly less than 2**32. It's not surprising that the absolute speedup is smaller, because _randbelow_without_getrandbits() does a lot more work that is untouched by the change. On the other hand, the speedup is more consistent, since _randbelow_without_getrandbits(n) almost never calls random() more than once for any n significantly less than 2**32. I will clean up my benchmark script and post it. Thanks for the feedback! ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue45976> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
