On 6 May 2013 08:34, "Chris Angelico" <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well you see, it was 70 bytes back in the Python 2 days (I'll defer to > Steven for data points earlier than that), but with Python 3, there > were two versions: one was 140 bytes representing 70 characters, the > other 280 bytes representing 70 characters. In Python 3.3, they were > merged, and a trivial amount of overhead added, so now it's 80 bytes > representing 70 characters. But you have an absolute guarantee that > it's correct now. > > Of course, the entire code can be represented as a single int now. You > used to have to use a long. > > ChrisA > --
Thanks. You have made my day. I may rise the average pay of a Python programmer in Portugal. I have asked for a raise back in December, and was told that it wouldn't happen before this year. I have done well. I think I deserve better pay than a supermarket employee now. I am sure that my efforts were appreciated and I will be rewarded. I am being sarcastic. The above paragraph wouldn't be true if I programmed in perl, c++ or lisp.
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
