Steven D'Aprano <ste...@remove.this.cybersource.com.au> wrote: > But this is just duplicating what timeit already does. Trust me, learn to > use it, you won't be sorry. Here's a trick that took me a long time to > learn: instead of copying your functions into the setup code of timeit, > you can just import them.
Thanks for the advise, i made the test using timeit and your very interesting method to import... Now i know how to use timeit simply ;-) New results on 1000 float values randomized from -500.0 to +500.0. Each test is timeit(1000) sign_0 : 0.375 sign_1 : 0.444 (+18%) sign_2 : 0.661 (+76%) sign_3 : 0.498 (+33%) It seems it don't change the relative results between the methods. Using timeit make measure accurate and remove print/range footprints. I also try Arnaud's proposition, it make sign_0 just a little better (-1%) -- Pierre-Alain Dorange <http://microwar.sourceforge.net/> Ce message est sous licence Creative Commons "by-nc-sa-2.0" <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/fr/> -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
