Le Wed, 14 Nov 2012 10:00:59 +0000, Chris Withers <ch...@simplistix.co.uk> a écrit : > On 14/11/2012 09:58, Merlijn van Deen wrote: > > On 14 November 2012 10:12, Chris Withers <ch...@simplistix.co.uk> > > wrote: > >> ...which made me a little sad > > > > Why did it make you sad? dict() takes 0.2µs, {} takes 0.04µs. In > > other words: you can run dict() _five million_ times per second, > > and {} twenty-five million times per second. That is 'a lot' and 'a > > lot'. It also means you are unlikely to notice the difference in > > real-world code. Just use the one you feel is clearer in the > > situation, and don't worry about micro-optimalization. > > I'm inclined to agree, but it makes me sad for two reasons: > > - it's something that people get hung up on, for better or worse. (if > it wasn't, Doug wouldn't have written his article) > > - it can make a difference, for example setting up a dict with many > keys at the core of a type loop.
Well, please post examples of *real-world* use cases where it makes a difference. Otherwise, you're asking us to add hacks to the implementation just to make you feel good, which is quite unacceptable. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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