[Python-Dev] proposal: add basic time type to the standard library
Tim Peters
tim.one@comcast.net
Sat, 09 Feb 2002 15:48:21 -0500
Sat, 09 Feb 2002 15:48:21 -0500
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] proposal: add basic time type to the standard library
- Next message: [Python-Dev] proposal: add basic time type to the standard library
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[Tim] > WRT RAM usage, a Python int is no smaller than a TimeStamp object. [Guido[ > Wrong, unless TimeStamps also use a custom allocator. Good point, and it doesn't (it uses PyObject_NEW). I don't think counting fractions of bytes is of great interest here, though, since I (still) believe it's the massive Zope DateTime type that's the focus of complaints. > The custom allocator uses 12 bytes per int (on a 32-bit machine) and > incurs malloc overhead + 8 bytes of additional overhead for every 82 ints. > That's about 12.2 bytes per int object; using malloc it would probably > be 24 bytes. (PyMalloc would probably do a little better, except it > would still round up to 16 bytes.) pymalloc overhead is a few percent; would work out to 16+f bytes per int object, for some f < 1.0. A difference is that "total memory dedicated to ints" never shrinks using the custom allocator, but can get reused for other objects under pymalloc.
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] proposal: add basic time type to the standard library
- Next message: [Python-Dev] proposal: add basic time type to the standard library
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]