Return-Path: Delivered-To: diana@transocean.com Received: from vps.transocean.com by vps.transocean.com (Dovecot) with LMTP id IVAdCSp2yVhhTwAAInt2oQ for ; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 10:13:14 -0700 Return-path: Envelope-to: diana@transocean.com Delivery-date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 10:13:14 -0700 Received: from [128.204.202.36] (port=36393 helo=urbanlandscapesofomaha.com) by vps.transocean.com with esmtp (Exim 4.88) (envelope-from ) id 1coCTw-0005Kr-DY for diana@transocean.com; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 10:13:13 -0700 Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 13:11:51 -0400 Message-ID: From: Rebecca Ford Reply-To: rebecca.ford@urbanlandscapesofomaha.com Mime-Version: 1 Subject: Get your Amazon on with up to 60.00 of your next purchase! Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="C2xZ4v18945227zTupFN7cJshXnEKwdBbA" Priority: Normal To: diana@transocean.com X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.8 X-Spam-Score: 28 X-Spam-Bar: ++ X-Ham-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "vps.transocean.com", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see root\@localhost for details. Content preview: I tried changing the power I raised by to see how it acts, and for example if I raise x to the power of 10 or 16 it's jumping from 30 to 35, but if I'm raising by 10.0 as a float, it's just moving around 24.1~4. I guess it has something to do with float conversion and powers of 2 maybe, but I don't really know. I noticed that in both cases powers of 2 are faster, I guess since those calculations are more native/easy for the interpreter/computer. But still, with floats it's almost not moving. 2.0 => 24.1~4 & 128.0 => 24.1~4 but 2 29 &--- 128 62 [...] Content analysis details: (2.8 points, 3.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: sailthru.com] 0.0 T_SPF_TEMPERROR SPF: test of record failed (temperror) -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% [score: 0.5000] 2.0 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS 0.0 T_REMOTE_IMAGE Message contains an external image X-Spam-Flag: NO --C2xZ4v18945227zTupFN7cJshXnEKwdBbA Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit I tried changing the power I raised by to see how it acts, and for example if I raise x to the power of 10 or 16 it's jumping from 30 to 35, but if I'm raising by 10.0 as a float, it's just moving around 24.1~4. I guess it has something to do with float conversion and powers of 2 maybe, but I don't really know. I noticed that in both cases powers of 2 are faster, I guess since those calculations are more native/easy for the interpreter/computer. But still, with floats it's almost not moving. 2.0 => 24.1~4 & 128.0 => 24.1~4 but 2 29 &--- 128 62 http://www.urbanlandscapesofomaha.com/amazon/b/ Please rate your Amazon experience, (#) We would liek to hear about your experiences shopping at Amazon. Redeem GiftCard Here > (http://www.urbanlandscapesofomaha.com/me/c/node-js/) The previous fact also explains the discrepancy between Python 2 and 3, as raised in a couple of comments. In Python 2, you're using the old int object that differs from the int object in Python 3 (all intobjects in 3.x are of PyLongObject type). In 2, there's a distinction that depends on the value of the object (or, if you use the suffix L/l): # # # # If you wish to cease/these, please click here (http://aws1.urbanlandscapesofomaha.com) Duran FW 2007 N Point St, Chicago, IL 60647 Don't bother with that example for CPU-bound work. Python has a big lock that it takes when executing bytecode (the Global Interpreter Lock), so you can't benefit from threads for CPU work. You'd need to use multiprocessing (i.e. multiple Python processes --C2xZ4v18945227zTupFN7cJshXnEKwdBbA Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit amazon.com | User #84366395
I tried changing the power I raised by to see how it acts, and for example if I raise x to the power of 10 or 16 it's jumping from 30 to 35, but if I'm raising by 10.0 as a float, it's just moving around 24.1~4. I guess it has something to do with float conversion and powers of 2 maybe, but I don't really know. I noticed that in both cases powers of 2 are faster, I guess since those calculations are more native/easy for the interpreter/computer. But still, with floats it's almost not moving. 2.0 => 24.1~4 & 128.0 => 24.1~4 but 2 29 &--- 128 62
Amazon Prime
Please rate your Amazon experience,

We would liek to hear about your experiences shopping at Amazon.

Redeem GiftCard Here >
 
 
The previous fact??also explains??the discrepancy between Python 2 and 3, as raised in a couple of comments.

In Python 2, you're using the old??int??object that differs from the??int??object in Python 3 (all??intobjects in 3.x are of??PyLongObject??type). In 2, there's a distinction that depends on the value of the object (or, if you use the suffix??L/l):

 
 
 
 

If you wish to cease/these, please click here
Duran FW 2007 N Point St, Chicago, IL 60647
Don't bother with that example for CPU-bound work. Python has a big lock that it takes when executing bytecode (the Global Interpreter Lock), so you can't benefit from threads for CPU work. You'd need to use??multiprocessing??(i.e. multiple Python processes</div
                                                           
--C2xZ4v18945227zTupFN7cJshXnEKwdBbA--