Question: Write a program that asks the user to enter a number of seconds, and works as follows:
There are 60 seconds in a minute. If the number of seconds
The "timeit" answer above that declares divmod to be slower has seriously flawed logic.
Test1 calls operators.
Test2 calls the function divmod, and calling a function has overhead.
A more accurate way to test would be:
import timeit
def moddiv(a,b):
q= a/b
r= a%b
return q,r
a=10
b=3
md=0
dm=0
for i in range(1,10):
c=a*i
md+= timeit.timeit( lambda: moddiv(c,b))
dm+=timeit.timeit( lambda: divmod(c,b))
print("moddiv ", md)
print("divmod ", dm)
moddiv 5.806157339000492
divmod 4.322451676005585
divmod is faster.
def convertSeconds(seconds):
h = seconds//(60*60)
m = (seconds-h*60*60)//60
s = seconds-(h*60*60)-(m*60)
return [h, m, s]
The function input is a number of seconds, and the return is a list of hours, minutes and seconds which that amount of seconds represent.
Although divmod() has been mentioned, I didn't see what I considered to be a nice example. Here's mine:
q=972021.0000 # For example
days = divmod(q, 86400)
# days[0] = whole days and
# days[1] = seconds remaining after those days
hours = divmod(days[1], 3600)
minutes = divmod(hours[1], 60)
print "%i days, %i hours, %i minutes, %i seconds" % (days[0], hours[0], minutes[0], minutes[1])
Which outputs:
11 days, 6 hours, 0 minutes, 21 seconds
def seconds_to_dhms(time):
seconds_to_minute = 60
seconds_to_hour = 60 * seconds_to_minute
seconds_to_day = 24 * seconds_to_hour
days = time // seconds_to_day
time %= seconds_to_day
hours = time // seconds_to_hour
time %= seconds_to_hour
minutes = time // seconds_to_minute
time %= seconds_to_minute
seconds = time
print("%d days, %d hours, %d minutes, %d seconds" % (days, hours, minutes, seconds))
time = int(input("Enter the number of seconds: "))
seconds_to_dhms(time)
Output: Enter the number of seconds: 2434234232
Result: 28174 days, 0 hours, 10 minutes, 32 seconds
This tidbit is useful for displaying elapsed time to varying degrees of granularity.
I personally think that questions of efficiency are practically meaningless here, so long as something grossly inefficient isn't being done. Premature optimization is the root of quite a bit of evil. This is fast enough that it'll never be your choke point.
intervals = (
('weeks', 604800), # 60 * 60 * 24 * 7
('days', 86400), # 60 * 60 * 24
('hours', 3600), # 60 * 60
('minutes', 60),
('seconds', 1),
)
def display_time(seconds, granularity=2):
result = []
for name, count in intervals:
value = seconds // count
if value:
seconds -= value * count
if value == 1:
name = name.rstrip('s')
result.append("{} {}".format(value, name))
return ', '.join(result[:granularity])
..and this provides decent output:
In [52]: display_time(1934815)
Out[52]: '3 weeks, 1 day'
In [53]: display_time(1934815, 4)
Out[53]: '3 weeks, 1 day, 9 hours, 26 minutes'
def normalize_seconds(seconds: int) -> tuple:
(days, remainder) = divmod(seconds, 86400)
(hours, remainder) = divmod(remainder, 3600)
(minutes, seconds) = divmod(remainder, 60)
return namedtuple("_", ("days", "hours", "minutes", "seconds"))(days, hours, minutes, seconds)