With the binaries /usr/sfw/bin/python and /usr/sfw/bin/idle the results
are 0.002279 resp. 0.222831 secs for the same print test.
The Python version is 2.3.3 and IDLE version 1.0.2 on the same Ultra 20
Opteron box running Solaris 10.
/Jean Brouwers
sam wrote:
> i forgot to mention that i'm ru
i forgot to mention that i'm running a version of python 2.3 (think
it's 2.3.5), as that's what was installed and i'm not hooked up to the
internet with the ultra 20 yet. that may account for some of the
difference.
sam
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On my Ultra 20 box, the test program takes 0.00039982 secs in a
terminal window and 0.236839 secs in IDLE, i.e. about 600x slower.
This is ActivePython 2.4.3 for Solaris 10 on a 2+ GHz Opteron.
A partial explanation for the difference in run time between terminal
and IDLE is that IDLE uses thru a
i was actually experimenting on windows on my own pc before the
workstation arrived, and IDLE printed a lot faster on windows than in
solaris for me too.
i would indeed complain to sun if i had ever got the impression that
anyone over there ever knew what was going on... : )
> but on the ot
sam wrote:
> in IDLE:
> 4.433 seconds
IDLE is designed for tinkering, not fast handling of non-trivial amounts
of output (it runs your program in a separate process and pipes data
to the interactive window over the network. and the interactive seems
to be redrawing the display for every lin
hi all,
i continue to footle around on my spanking new ultra 20 (1.8GHz /
Opteron Model 144), gradually trying to get to grips with python and
unix both.
the slow print time in IDLE had already struck me as rather odd.
running programs with heavy print requirements from the terminal was a
major d
