RetroSearch Browse

Wed Mar 10 06:10:50 EST 2004 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-March/043009.html

"A.M. Kuchling" <amk at amk.ca> writes:

> On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 08:59:52 -0500, Phillip J. Eby
> <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
>> I personally don't think it'll help much, if the goal is to reduce
>> cache misses.  After all, the code is all still there.  But, it
>> should not do
>
> For a planned PyCon lightning talk, I'm benchmarking various
> combinations of optimizer options.
> One interesting result: CVS Python gets 25997 pystones on my machine
> when compiled with
> -O3 (the default), but 26707 when compiled with gcc's -Os flag.  -Os
>  optimizes for size,
> running the subset of the -O2 optimizations that don't increase code size.

What architecture?  I played around on my ibook with various
compilation options and running with -fprofile-arcs and so on and
basically came to the conclusion that nothing made very much
difference (once past -O2).  Can't remember if I tried -Os.

Cheers,
mwh

-- 
  If I had wanted your website to make noise I would have licked
  my finger and rubbed it across the monitor.
                           -- signature of "istartedi" on slashdot.org

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-March/043009.html below:

[Python-Dev] Re: Who cares about the performance of these opcodes?