Message54227
Logged In: YES
user_id=21627
Using xrange for an infinite loop qualifies as "cute" =
"obviously straining for effect". The most natural way of an
infinite loop is "while True". There are certainly other
ways to express an infinite loop (like reading from
/dev/zero, or writing an unbounded recursion), but arguing
that xrange is "much faster" is obviously straining for
effect: If the loop is infinite, how can it be much faster?
And why does it matter if it is? (in my measurements, it is
30% faster, counting the time for a given number of iterations). |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2007-08-23 16:08:18 | admin | link | issue1003935 messages |
2007-08-23 16:08:18 | admin | create | |
|