> any() and all() also short-circuit, and they move the iteration out of
> Python into the C runtime. My guess is the solutions with any() and
> all() and equivalent hoisting of string.printable will be faster than
> yours, but I don't want to take the time to check ATM...I would also try
> using set(string.printable) instead of string.printable...
if they do, yeah, that'll be faster since it'll run in C. you're
probably also right about set since it doesn't have to "look into a
string" to see whether it has a character or not. (this is the same
as the advantages that a hash table has over an array.).
> Anyone feel like spending some time with timeit? Otherwise we're just
> guessing anyway.
i don't have any time myself either (getting ready for OSCON talk),
but i'm not sure what terry's OP was about... looking for a
well-written piece of code, a faster-performing snippet, or both? i
think he was just unsatissfied with his 1st attempt.
-- wesley
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Core Python Programming", Prentice Hall, (c)2007,2001
http://corepython.com
wesley.j.chun :: wescpy-at-gmail.com
python training and technical consulting
cyberweb.consulting : silicon valley, ca
http://cyberwebconsulting.com
_______________________________________________
Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
