cat < /dev/urandom
I was tinkering around at the interpreter.. bored, thinking of a way to create a single object that can store a specified string, and store the instance of the __builtin__.replace and here is what I found out:
variable = 'this is a string'
variable = variable.replace
and tada, it beats calling the same call over and over, eliminates extra reevaluation caused by the dots, and seems to be an optimization, here are some example:
item 1: clocked in at 1.18292808533s
import time
variable = '12345'
timer = time.time()
for i in range(100000): variable.replace('1', str(i))
print time.time() - timer
item 2: clocked in at 1.0119099617s
import time
variable = '12345'
variable = variable.replace
timer = time.time()
for i in range(100000): variable('1', str(i))
print time.time() - timer
now note that the improved version is item 2, as you can see there is an obvious optimization factor there in its output. now lets give it a try with a range of 1000000.
item 1: clocks in at 12.0694580078s
item 2: clocks in at 10.3100938797s
item 1: clocks in at 11.8515238762s (with xrange)
item 2: clocks in at 10.2462799549s (with xrange)
do note that the str() is just an extra call that added weight to the loop, so the previous timings can be chopped down a bit if the str() calls were calculated precisely.
moral of this story: one needs unmetered bandwidth for quicker porn download speeds, otherwise boredom may overtake you.
variable = 'this is a string'
variable = variable.replace
and tada, it beats calling the same call over and over, eliminates extra reevaluation caused by the dots, and seems to be an optimization, here are some example:
item 1: clocked in at 1.18292808533s
import time
variable = '12345'
timer = time.time()
for i in range(100000): variable.replace('1', str(i))
print time.time() - timer
item 2: clocked in at 1.0119099617s
import time
variable = '12345'
variable = variable.replace
timer = time.time()
for i in range(100000): variable('1', str(i))
print time.time() - timer
now note that the improved version is item 2, as you can see there is an obvious optimization factor there in its output. now lets give it a try with a range of 1000000.
item 1: clocks in at 12.0694580078s
item 2: clocks in at 10.3100938797s
item 1: clocks in at 11.8515238762s (with xrange)
item 2: clocks in at 10.2462799549s (with xrange)
do note that the str() is just an extra call that added weight to the loop, so the previous timings can be chopped down a bit if the str() calls were calculated precisely.
moral of this story: one needs unmetered bandwidth for quicker porn download speeds, otherwise boredom may overtake you.
