"Martin v. Loewis" <martin@v.loewis.de> writes: > I just performed some benchmark of pymalloc, compared to glibc 2.2 > malloc, using xmlproc (a pure-Python XML parser) as the sample > application. On an artificial input document, the standard > configuration ran 16.3s; the configuration with pymalloc ran 15s. Cool! > I recommend to enable pymalloc by default; I can commit the necessary > changes if desired. I think too many extension modules will crash with pymalloc due to PyObject_Del/PyMem_Del confusion (e.g. zodb, which scared the crap out of me last week when I thought it was something I'd done on the release22-maint branch). OTOH, they probably won't get fixed until people start using pymalloc all the time... Cheers, M. -- 112. Computer Science is embarrassed by the computer. -- Alan Perlis, http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html
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