Testing slightly different python randomisation manoeuvres
- From: Jacob Kruger <jacobk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 16:19:50 +0200
Testing python randomising a number between 1 and 100, repeating process 100
thousand times, the automatic integer output method took approximately 279
milliseconds the slightly more involved (in terms of having to convert
randomised number into a clean integer in the right range) method took
approximately 59 milliseconds - the difference was 220 milliseconds slower if
you asked it to automatically give you a number in the range 1 to 100, as
opposed to taking the decimal/floating point number more automatically
generated, and multiplying it then by 100, and converting it to an integer as
such.
This is something that almost immediately popped up in my mind when was
reviewing the various randomisation objects/methods provided by modules built
into python, after had already made my own workaround for spitting out a clean
integer between 1 and 100, and then thought of double checking if there was
some or other built in/automatic process to generate one as such, and then I
put together the little bit of code to test the differences in execution
time...<smile>
Dunno why I thought of trying this out, since am actually just busy going
through one of the learn python books, and while working through pieces on
lists and dictionary objects, I was messing around with storing the full
alphabet in these collection objects, and then spitting out a random letter,
etc. etc., and it just ended up making me get around to thinking
about/considering this.
Stay well
Jacob Kruger
Blind Biker
Skype: BlindZA
'...fate had broken his body, but not his spirit...'
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
Other related posts:
