A RetroSearch Logo

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

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2001-April/014444.html below:

[Python-Dev] ineffective optimization: method tables

[Python-Dev] ineffective optimization: method tablesMartin v. Loewis martin@loewis.home.cs.tu-berlin.de
Tue, 24 Apr 2001 08:24:09 +0200
> Unfortunately, all my benchmarks show this patch to be ineffective
> in terms of speeding up the interpreter.  Anyone know why?

I guess because you took PyObject_IsTrue. After profiling some
application, I found that this is a frequent function, so I thought it
should be optimized.

I then found that most of the time, it gets Py_True, Py_False, or
Py_None as an argument, so I checked for identity with these objects.
Indeed, that covered the majority of the calls - but with no
significant speed gain when special-cased.

So I think I agree with Guido: even as these functions are frequently
called, this is not where the time is consumed.

Regards,
Martin



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