-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Ewing <[email protected]>
Sent: 15 June 2020 07:23
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Python-ideas] Re: For quicker execution, don't refcount objects that
can't be deleted
On 15/06/20 5:11 pm, Steve Barnes wrote:
> Of course if we had a NaN value for integers, int('NaN'), then we could just
> set the initial count to it and since NaN - anything = NaN all would be
> golden.
Or we could use floating-point reference counts...
--
Greg
[Steve Barnes]
I thought of floating-point reference counts but:
a) 65535.0 -= 1 is slower than 65535 =- 1 (7.6% on my system quite a bit worse
on some embedded systems).
b) There comes a point in floats, (for large values of x), where x - 1 == x
(about 10**15 which for some scientific & big data calculations is not that
big) but unless reference counting uses python integers, rather than C, this
will not be an issue.
c) of course I like the concept of integer nan, inf, etc. 😊
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/JGU6SHN56CUFKD4QGLDCORNW5BEPGKGD/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
