Calculation Overlay | Bitcointalksearch.org

PowerGlove

hero member

Activity: 510

Merit: 4005

That's some goofy looking code, OP. Cheesy

(Why is the function called fib when there's nothing Fibonacci-esque going on? What is that unused n parameter supposed to be for? Why are you checking if something is present in elements2, but only ever appending things to elements? etc.)

There's an off-by-one error in the loop count (that is, if you meant for every integer, between, and including, 10000 and 20000 to be in the elements list, then you should be waiting for its length to be 10001, rather than 10000; as it stands now, elements will always end up without one random integer from that range). Alternatively, if you did actually only want elements to have 10000 entries, then you should be picking your random numbers like this: random.randint(10000, 19999).

If all you meant to accomplish was to produce a shuffled list of every integer in range(10000, 20000), then it's much faster (~750x on my machine, compared to your script), and much clearer, to just do the following:

Code:

import random

elements = [x for x in range(10000, 20000)]

random.shuffle(elements)

Your second script is harder to make sense of (because you're testing the contents of elements2 without ever actually appending anything to it: elements2 is empty when the script starts, and is still empty by the time the script ends). If I fix that problem, your script still doesn't make much sense, because then the loop termination logic (which only considers elements) will often leave elements2 with either too few, or (one) too many entries.

Because you seemed surprised that your second script took longer to execute than your first, I can only assume that what you were trying to do was to run a 10000-iteration loop that left elements with 5000 random integers from range(10000, 20000) and elements2 with 5000 random integers from range(20000, 30000). If that's what you were aiming at, then this should do the trick:

Code:

import random

elements = random.sample(range(10000, 20000), k=5000)

elements2 = random.sample(range(20000, 30000), k=5000)

(I know I'm bumping an old topic; I'm catching up on unread stuff.)

odolvlobo

legendary

Activity: 4466

Merit: 3391

Quote from: pooya87 on February 18, 2023, 10:46:50 PM

If I understand your code correctly the end result in your "elements" is a shuffled array containing all numbers between x and y (like 10k and 20k). So why not just create an array of the numbers between x and y sequentially (10000,10001, 10002,...) then shuffle that array?

Nailed it.

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

If I understand your code correctly the end result in your "elements" is a shuffled array containing all numbers between x and y (like 10k and 20k). So why not just create an array of the numbers between x and y sequentially (10000,10001, 10002,...) then shuffle that array?
Right now your code also has two bottlenecks slowing it down. First is repeated usage of RNG to generate all numbers between x and y and the fact that it may encounter collisions so to generate 10 items for example you may repeat the process 12 times.

You don't have to touch the list itself either, you can create an array of "shuffle indexes" to act as a map which you can reuse too. That "map" can be generated once at the start.

n0nce

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 5834

not your keys, not your coins!

Executing your code 20,000 times will obviously take longer than running it 10,000 times.
You may speed it up by using a set ^[1], which will save you those lengthy duplicate checks.

Something like:

Code:

elements = set()
elements2 = set()

while len(elements) < 10000:
elements.add(random.randint(10000, 20000))
elements2.add(random.randint(20000, 30000))

It is a lot quicker. Your and my code in comparison:

Code:

>> python3 test.py
Time foo: 9.392797946929932s, time bar: 0.1551358699798584s

Full code:

Code:

import time, random

elements = []
elements2 = []

myset0 = set()
myset1 = set()

def foo():
while len(elements) < 10000:
priv = random.randint(10000, 20000)
priv2 = random.randint(20000, 30000)
if priv not in elements:
elements.append(priv)
if priv2 not in elements2:
elements2.append(priv2)

def bar():
while len(myset0) < 10000:
myset0.add(random.randint(10000, 20000))
myset1.add(random.randint(20000, 30000))

start0 = time.time()
foo()
end0 = time.time()

start1 = time.time()
bar()
end1 = time.time()

print(f"Time foo: {end0-start0}s, time bar: {end1-start1}s")

Since you provided no context though, I assume the order of numbers is more important than the numbers themselves? Because your code generates... all of them... and there are obviously easier ways to do that. Sets unfortunately don't have an order and will be output in ascending order, from my testing.

[1] https://www.w3schools.com/python/python_sets.asp

Kostelooscoin

member

Activity: 206

Merit: 16

hi here my code :

Code:

import time
import random

elements = []

def fib(n):
   while len(elements) < 10000:
   priv = random.randint(10000, 20000)
   if priv not in elements:
   elements.append(priv)
start = time.time()
fib(1)
end = time.time()
elapsed = end - start


print(f'Temps d\'exécution : {elapsed:.2}s')

result :

Code:

exécution : 5.4s

Is it possible to do this while keeping the same execution time ?

Code:

import time
import random

elements = []
elements2 = []

def fib(n):
   while len(elements) < 10000:
   priv = random.randint(10000, 20000)
   priv2 = random.randint(20000, 30000)
   if priv not in elements:
   elements.append(priv)
   if priv2 not in elements2:
   elements.append(priv2)

start = time.time()
fib(1)
end = time.time()
elapsed = end - start

print(f'Temps d\'exécution : {elapsed:.2}s')

Code:

exécution : 12.26s

yet elements have 10000 entries as at the beginning

Topic: Calculation Overlay (Read 158 times)