good point. Anyway, the function is no longer called as often as Alexey originally pointed out, so it would make a negligible difference. I will change it though.
Massimo On Jun 9, 11:24 am, AchipA <[email protected]> wrote: > Any particular reason not doing is_integer via a 'try: int(i) except: > return False' statement ? It should be faster than regexes. > > On Jun 7, 1:49 pm, Iceberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Jun7, 6:35pm, Alexey Nezhdanov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > 2) is_integer is a fast call, but with 1.1k (!) calls ... > > > > Replaced it with my own version: > > > integer_pat=re.compile('[0-9]+$') > > > is_integer=lambda x: integer_pat.match(x) > > > it's about 2.3 times faster. C version would be even better. > > > If so, perhaps this is even better: > > > integer_pat=re.compile('[0-9]+$') > > is_integer=integer_pat.match > > > Because lambda is considered as much slower than built-in functions, > > AFAIK. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py Web Framework" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
