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/2002-May/023887.html below:

[Python-Dev] iterzip()

[Python-Dev] iterzip()Tim Peters tim.one@comcast.net
Thu, 02 May 2002 00:53:33 -0400
[Andrew MacIntyre]
>>> FreeBSD 4.4 (2.1.1 w/o pymalloc)
>>>   justpush  89.72
>>>    justzip 110.41
>>>
>>> FreeBSD 4.4 (recent CVS with pymalloc)
>>>   justpush  19.21
>>>    justzip  46.32
>>>
...
>>> I'm surprised at the difference in the 2 sets of results on
>>> it.  AFAIK, the compiler version and switches are identical for
>>> the two interpreters (the 2.1.1 is from the binary package on the
>>> FreeBSD 4.4 CDs).

[Tim]
>> justpush() primarily tests realloc() speed, and pymalloc isn't (yet)
>> involved in managing list-gut memory.  So I expect this has much more
>> to do with the libc(s) they're using than with the compiler(s).

[Andrew]
> I was only referring to the two FreeBSD runs,

I know.

> where the same libc is involved.

That I didn't know (only the compiler was mentioned above).  So you've got
your own mystery.  What are you going to do about it <wink>?  Calling the
platform realloc is the only potentially expensive thing justpush() does,
pymalloc isn't involved with list realloc, and your 2.1.1 spent 70 extra
seconds doing *something*.





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