On Sat, 27 Jan 2001 18:28:02 +0100, Andreas Jung <andreas@andreas-jung.com> wrote: >Is there a reason why 2.1 runs significantly slower ? >Both Python versions were compiled with -g -O2 only. [CC'ing to python-dev] Confirmed: [amk@mira Python-2.0]$ ./python Lib/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 3.14 This machine benchmarks at 3184.71 pystones/second [amk@mira Python-2.0]$ python2.1 Lib/test/pystone.py Pystone(1.1) time for 10000 passes = 3.81 This machine benchmarks at 2624.67 pystones/second The ceval.c changes seem a likely candidate to have caused this. Anyone want to run Marc-Andre's microbenchmarks and see how the numbers have changed? --amk
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