Channel
@python_prosto1
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
363subscribers
+9 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002263938399 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @python_prosto1 |
| Created | Between 1 September 2024 and 31 March 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 30 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 30 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/python_prosto1 |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 30 Aug 2026, 04:17 | 363 | +5 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 05:36 | 358 | -2 |
| 15 Aug 2026, 02:52 | 360 | +6 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 06:46 | 354 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 15:10 | 354 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 13 July 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (13 July 2026 – 6 August 2026) |
| Views total | 96 |
| Reactions total | 10 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 8 Aug 2026, 06:46 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
69 reactions across 20 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 55.1% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 38 | 55.1% | |
| 🔥 | 18 | 26.1% | |
| ❤ | 6 | 8.70% | |
| ❤🔥 | 4 | 5.80% | |
| 🏆 | 3 | 4.35% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 20 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 69reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 13 July 2026 to 6 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
📈 From O(n²) to O(n): Проверка на дубликаты 📌 Задача Определить, есть ли в списке повторяющиеся элементы. ❌ Наивное решение def has_duplicates(nums): for i in range(len(nums)): for j in range(i + 1, len(nums)): if nums[i] == nums[j]: return True return False Сложность: O(n²) ✅ Оптимизированное решение def has_duplicates(nums): seen = set() for num in nums: …
👍2
🧠 Interview Thinking: «Не оптимизируй то, что не является проблемой» 📌 Задача Проверить, является ли строка палиндромом. 👶 Как думает junior Сразу пишет решение с двумя указателями: def is_palindrome(s): left, right = 0, len(s) - 1 while left < right: if s[left] != s[right]: return False left += 1 right -= 1 return True «Так эффективнее.» 🧠 Как думает сильный канд…
👍1🔥1
❌ Rookie Mistakes: list *= n с вложенными списками На первый взгляд кажется, что ты создаёшь несколько независимых списков. Но это одна из самых коварных ловушек Python. ❌ Ошибка matrix = [[0] * 3] * 3 matrix[0][1] = 1 print(matrix) 🤔 Ожидание [ [0, 1, 0], [0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0] ] 💥 Реальность [ [0, 1, 0], [0, 1, 0], [0, 1, 0] ] 🧠 Почему так? Оператор * не создаёт новые вложенные спис…
👍3
🧰 Code Cleanup: «Не используй list(), если можно сразу создать список» ❌ Плохой код result = list() for i in range(10): result.append(i * i) ✅ Улучшенный код result = [i * i for i in range(10)] 💥 Объяснение В первом варианте список создаётся пустым, а затем постепенно заполняется. Во втором сразу видно, что именно должно получиться. ⚡️ Правило Если задача — создать новый список, а не изменять существующий,…
🔥3
⏱️ Big O Breakdown: рекурсивный Фибоначчи def fib(n): if n <= 1: return n return fib(n - 1) + fib(n - 2) Классика из учебника. Выглядит элегантно. n — входное число. Какая сложность по времени? A) O(n) B) O(n²) C) O(2ⁿ) D) O(n log n) Правильный ответ: C Три строки кода, а под ними — экспоненциальный взрыв. Разбор Каждый вызов fib(n) порождает два новых вызова: fib(n-1) и fib(n-2). Те — ещё по д…
🔥3
🎭 Red Flag: изменение списка, по которому идёт цикл Плохой пример def remove_inactive(users): for user in users: if not user.is_active: users.remove(user) # удаляем прямо во время итерации users = [alice, bob, carol, dave] # bob и carol неактивны remove_inactive(users) print([u.name for u in users]) # ['alice', 'carol', 'dave'] ← carol выжила! Код выглядит очевидно правильным…
❤3
📈 From O(n log n) to O(n) Задача Дан массив из n чисел. Верни k наибольших. Обычно k сильно меньше n (топ-10 из миллиона). Наивное решение «Отсортирую и возьму хвост.» def top_k(nums, k): return sorted(nums, reverse=True)[:k] Коротко и корректно. Но сложность — O(n log n): мы упорядочили весь массив, хотя нужны всего k элементов. Проблема Мы делаем гораздо больше работы, чем требует задача. Порядок остальных…
👍4
⚖️ This vs That: list vs tuple «Кортеж — это неизменяемый список» — так отвечают почти все. Верно, но неполно: разница глубже, чем возможность менять. Что делает list Изменяемая последовательность. Можно добавлять, удалять, менять элементы: items = [1, 2, 3] items.append(4) items[0] = 99 # ок Что делает tuple Неизменяемая последовательность. После создания — только чтение: point = (1, 2, 3) point[0] = 99 …
👍4
❌ Rookie Mistakes: except ловит не то, что кажется try: config = load_config() value = config["timeout"] result = process(value) except KeyError: print("В конфиге нет ключа timeout") result = default_result() Логика ясная: если в конфиге нет timeout — берём дефолт. Но однажды process внутри себя тоже кинет KeyError — по совсем другой причине. И этот блок его проглотит, напечатав неверное сообщен…
👍4
🧠 Interview Thinking Похоже на классику про акции, но правило одно меняет всё — и на этом ловят. Задача Дан массив prices — цена акции по дням. Теперь можно совершать сколько угодно сделок: покупать и продавать много раз (но держать не больше одной акции одновременно). Максимизируй суммарную прибыль. Пример: [7, 1, 5, 3, 6, 4] → 7. Как думает junior «Много сделок… надо найти лучшие моменты входа и выхода, переб…
🏆3
🧰 Code Cleanup: ручная проверка ключа → dict.get и setdefault Плохой код # достать значение с дефолтом if "timeout" in config: timeout = config["timeout"] else: timeout = 30 # накопить в словарь списков if key in groups: groups[key].append(value) else: groups[key] = [value] Работает. Но каждое обращение к словарю — это четыре строки на «а вдруг ключа нет». Проверка in, потом снова доступ по тому ж…
👍4
🧠 Что выведет код x = [1, 2, 3] def modify(lst): lst = lst + [4] def mutate(lst): lst.append(4) modify(x) print(x) mutate(x) print(x) Варианты: A) [1, 2, 3, 4] и [1, 2, 3, 4] B) [1, 2, 3] и [1, 2, 3, 4] C) [1, 2, 3, 4] и [1, 2, 3, 4, 4] D) [1, 2, 3] и [1, 2, 3] Правильный ответ: B Одна функция «меняет» список, другая — нет. Почему? Разбор Python передаёт аргументы не по значению и не по ссылке, а по…
🔥3
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @python_prosto1. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
@python_prosto1 named 2 handles that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all.A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 30 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Prosto Python | вопросы с собесов” (@python_prosto1), 363 subscribers as measured 30 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/python_prosto1.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.