On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 1:57 PM Kyle Stanley <aeros...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Add (much faster for dicts):
> >>> timeit.timeit("s = set(); s.add(0)", number=100_000_000)
> 13.330938750001224
> >>> timeit.timeit("d = {}; d[0] = None", number=100_000_000)
> 5.788865385999088
I think this is an artifact of Python not having an empty set literal.
>>> timeit.timeit("s = set(); s.add(0)", number=100_000_000)
13.275540543720126
>>> timeit.timeit("d = dict(); d[0] = None", number=100_000_000)
13.044076398015022
>>> timeit.timeit("d = {}; d[0] = None", number=100_000_000)
6.088695731014013
>>> timeit.timeit("s = {1}; s.add(0)", number=100_000_000)
9.260965215042233
>>> timeit.timeit("d = {1:2}; d[0] = None", number=100_000_000)
8.75433829985559
When both use the constructor call or both use a literal, the
difference is far smaller. I'd call this one a wash.
ChrisA
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/ODZYHNI57MFZD3I7TGP3B3HJTRX36KGB/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
