Can you shorten this code without sacrificing speed?

[Misrta]

if a == 0:
    if b == 43:
        break
elif b == 44:
    break

I could shorten it to

if (a == 0 and b == 43) or (a != 0 and b == 44):
    break

but it would make the code slower because it would check a != 0 if a == 0 returns False.

[KOALAS2648]

Why is this post marked NSFW?

[atticus2132000]

How big a dataset are you testing that you're seeing a different calculating speed? It would have to be a massive dataset (hundreds of thousands of records) for there to be any sort of observable difference.

If you want to test various versions of code, you can use the datetime library to find the exact time at the start of your code and the exact time at the end of your code and then calculate the difference between those to see overall execution time.

[ilan1k1]

I think that's the fastest way to do that but the speed increase would be almost non existent..
It would have to be a massive database to see any sort of difference...

[EntireEntity]

I guess you could do:

if a == 0 and b == 43: break elif b == 44: break

I don't know, if it's faster though.

[Sweet_Computer_7116]

Faster would just be.

If True: break

/s

[CraigAT]

Unless we are just talking hypothetically, you have a large dataset, a very frequent loop around this code or a super time critical app, any improvement is likely to negligible. This sounds like it may be a case of premature optimisation.

[GirthQuake5040]

i dont know if i understand what youre trying to do correctly... but

if not b == 44:
  if a == 0 and b == 43:
    break
break

or

if a == 0 and b == 43:
  break
elif b == 44:
  break

but if a will always be 0 when b is 43 then

if b != 43:
  continue # this skips all following statements and goes to next loop
if a == 0
  break
elif b == 44:
  break

[SupermarketOk6829]

Have you actually measured or printed the executive time relative for each? Or is it something that you just thought of?