> A 2% speed improvement with gcc on low-endian machines. My guess is that > this > new pattern for NEXTARG() is detected and optimized as a single (*short) > loading. One other thought: When testing these kind of optimizations, do not use PyStone! Unfortunately, part of its design is to time a long for-loop and the net that timing out of the total. At best, that means that improvements to for-loops don't showup on PyStone. At worst, PyStone gives results *opposite* of reality. Because of cache effects, empty for-loops run a tad faster than for-loops that do something. Raymond Hettinger
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4