Benchmark script / more consistent string concatenation syntax #31
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…'s fix this first
… probably only wanted to pass a text node. rather edge-casey, but hey...
…due to performance reasons
Closed
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@softvar: Not sure if you like this syntax better, but it's more consistent with the rest of the code and a bit shorter - see whether you want to merge it or not. In addition I've created a little benchmark script.
Result of benchmark on my recent-ish iMac 27'' with the proposed script: ~0.54 seconds for a 6000 layer nested table. At 7000 layers it runs into a segfault (too many intermediate objects?). Anyways, performance is probably not a big issue with this library, i.e. python itself is a bigger bottleneck.