min

In python, which one is faster ? numpy.max(), numpy.min() or max(), min() My list/array length varies from 2 to 600. Which one should I use to save some run time ? Well from my timings it follows if you already have numpy array a you should use a.max (the source tells it's the same as np.max if a.max available). But if you have built-in list then most of the time takes converting it into np.ndarray => that's why max is better in your timings. In essense: if np.ndarray then a.max , if list and no need for all the machinery of np.ndarray then standard max . I was also interested in this and

The stdint.h header at my company reads: #define INT64_MIN -9223372036854775808LL But in some code in my project, a programmer wrote: #undef INT64_MIN #define INT64_MIN (-9223372036854775807LL -1) He then uses this definition in the code. The project compiles with no warnings/errors. When I attempted to remove his definition and use the default one, I got: error: integer constant is so large that it is unsigned The two definitions appear to be equivalent. Why does one compile fine and the other fails? -9223372036854775808LL is not a single literal. It's an expression consisting of a unary -

This question already has an answer here: Maximum and Minimum values for ints 8 answers Specs: Python 3.3.1 What I was trying to do: "Using Python, determine the largest and smallest ints, longs, floats, and complex numbers that your system can handle." What I did: I went through Python's math modules and all built-in functions relating to math and numbers, but couldn't find a way to do this. I also tried something like max(range(0,)) but it returned ValueError: max() arg is an empty sequence error. Question: How to determine largest/smallest int/long/float/complex numbers my system can handle

which.max and which.min will return the smallest index of the max or min value if there are ties. Is there a way around this so that the largest index is returned without affecting the efficiency of the function? max.col has this exact functionality, but I am dealing with a vector not a matrix. You could do like this: x<-c(1,2,1,4,3,4) #identical to which.max, except returns all indices with max which(x==max(x)) [1] 4 6 z<-which(x==max(x)) z[length(z)] [1] 6 #or with tail tail(which(x==max(x)),1) [1] 6 edit: Or, you could also use max.col function for vectors like this: max.col(t(x),"last") [1

I'm finding max value and min value of a list by using max(list) and min(list) in Python. However, I wonder how to manage empty lists. For example if the list is an empty list [] , the program raises 'ValueError: min() arg is an empty sequence' but I would like to know how to make the program just print 'empty list or invalid input' instead of just crashing. How to manage those errors? Catch and handle the exception. try: print(min(l), max(l)) except (ValueError, TypeError): print('empty list or invalid input') ValueError is raised with an empty sequence. TypeError is raised when the sequence

If I want to select min and max values from a whole table I can use this: SELECT min(price) as min_price, max(price) as max_price FROM `prices` But how to select min and max values from just a part of a table? For example, I have 30 rows in a table. I want to select min and max values from first ten rows, then from second ten rows and then form the last 10. I've tried something like SELECT min(price) as min_price, max(price) as max_price FROM `prices` LIMIT 0,10 but this did not work. How can I solve this problem with minimum queries? reggie SELECT MIN(PRICE) AS MinPrice, MAX(PRICE) AS