ishanpage@programming.dev to Programming@programming.devEnglish · 1 year agoProgramming "with the grain"ishan.pageexternal-linkmessage-square4fedilinkarrow-up128arrow-down11
arrow-up127arrow-down1external-linkProgramming "with the grain"ishan.pageishanpage@programming.dev to Programming@programming.devEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square4fedilink
minus-squareishanpage@programming.devOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·1 year agoOTOH, the more pythonic one will probably perform worse, but I’m not familiar enough with Python internals to make that claim without benchmarks. I’ll try it out and add the data in the article
minus-squareHazzard@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·1 year agoEh, the python one will probably perform better, because sum is probably written in native C under the hood.
minus-squarejadero@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·1 year agoI’ve yet to find a language where “doing it yourself” has higher performance than calling the built-in or library function. There are edge cases, but rarely enough to be bothered about.
OTOH, the more pythonic one will probably perform worse, but I’m not familiar enough with Python internals to make that claim without benchmarks.
I’ll try it out and add the data in the article
Eh, the python one will probably perform better, because
sumis probably written in native C under the hood.I’ve yet to find a language where “doing it yourself” has higher performance than calling the built-in or library function. There are edge cases, but rarely enough to be bothered about.