Performance of int/long in Python 3

[rusi]

On Apr 2, 3:58 pm, Steve Simmons <square.st... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 02/04/2013 10:43, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 02/04/2013 10:24, jmfauth wrote:
> >> On 2 avr, 10:35, Steven D'Aprano <steve
> >> +comp.lang.pyt... at pearwood.info> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 19:03:17 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> >>> So what? Who cares if it takes 0.00002 second to insert a character
> >>> instead of 0.00001 second? That's still a hundred times faster than you
> >>> can type.
>
> >> ---------
>
> >> This not the problem. The interesting point is that they
> >> are good and "less good" Unicode implementations.
>
> >> jmf
>
> > The interesting point is that the Python 3.3 unicode implementation is
> > correct, that of most other languages is buggy. Or have I fallen
> > victim to the vicious propaganda of the various Pythonistas who
> > frequent this list?
>
> Mark,
>
> Thanks for asking this question.
>
> It seems to me that jmf *might* be moving towards a vindicated
> position.  There is some interest now in duplicating, understanding and
> (hopefully!) extending his test results, which can only be a Good Thing
> - whatever the outcome and wherever the facepalm might land.

Whew! Very reassuring to hear some sanity in this discussion at long
last!