Noam Raphael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 12/29/05, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What could be done is to add a test for excess dummy entries and trigger > > a periodic resize operation. That would make the memory available for > > other parts of the currently running script and possibly available for > > the O/S. > > > > The downside is slowing down a fine-grained operation like pop(). For > > dictionaries, this wasn't considered worth it. For sets, I made the > > same design decision. It wasn't an accident. I don't plan on changing > > that decision unless we find a body of real world code that would be > > better-off with more frequent re-sizing. > > The computer scientist in me prefers O() terms over changes in a > constant factor, but that's only me. Perhaps a note about it should be > added to the documentation, though?
The computer scientist in me agrees with you, but the practical application developer in me argues that every microsecond adds up. - Josiah _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
