On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 02:03:52 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Again, the technique you are using does a pointless amount of extra
> work. The values in the xrange object are already floats, calling float
> on them just wastes time.
Er what?
Sorry, please ignore that. This is completely untrue --
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 06:24:04 -0800, Allard Warrink wrote:
> Within a python script I'm using a couple of different lists containing
> a large number of floats (+8M). The execution of this script fails
> because of an memory error (insufficient memory). I thought this was
> strange because I delete
En Wed, 13 Jan 2010 11:24:04 -0300, Allard Warrink
escribió:
Within a python script I'm using a couple of different lists
containing a large number of floats (+8M). The execution of this
script fails because of an memory error (insufficient memory).
I thought this was strange because I delete
Allard Warrink, 13.01.2010 15:24:
so I did some investigation on the memory use of the script. I found
out that when i populated the lists with floats using a for ... in
range() loop a lot of overhead memory is used and that this memory is
not freed after populating the list and is also not freed
Allard Warrink, 13.01.2010 15:24:
I found out that when i populated the lists with floats using a for ... in
range() loop a lot of overhead memory is used
Note that range() returns a list in Python 2.x. For iteration, use
xrange(), or switch to Python 3 where range() returns an iterable.
Ste
Within a python script I'm using a couple of different lists
containing a large number of floats (+8M). The execution of this
script fails because of an memory error (insufficient memory).
I thought this was strange because I delete all lists that are not
longer necessary directly and my workstatio
