On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 10:39:25 -0800, George Sakkis wrote: > On Jan 23, 4:37 am, Steven D'Aprano > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 23:33:00 -0800, George Sakkis wrote: >> > As I mentioned already, I consider the seeking of the most efficient >> > solution a legitimate question, regardless of whether a "dumb" >> > solution is fast enough for an application. Call it a "don't be >> > sloppy" principle if you wish. >> >> Sure, by why do you limit "efficient" and "don't be sloppy" to mean >> "write the fastest executing code you can, regardless of every other >> trade-off"? > > I explicitly didn't limit sloppiness to inefficiency and mentioned it's > a tradeoff:
Of course you did, and I was being sloppy. The "you" was meant more as a generic you than you yourself. Sorry for the confusion. As for your other points, I think we're actually very much in agreement, except for your tolerance of random posters asking what I believe is an incoherent question: "what's the fastest way to do ...?". It seems to me you're willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they've done their profiling and considered their trade-offs, or at the very worst are asking from purely intellectual curiosity. Call me cynical if you like, but I think that in the absence of any direct evidence supporting those things, the most likely possibility is the opposite. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
