Guido van Rossum wrote: >>My nightly run of pybench went up from the usual 7590ms per >>run to around 8200ms between Monday night and today. Can anyone >>explain this ? > > Did you compare the outputs? There could be importants hint there! > :-) Unfortunately, the cronjob always uses the same file to store the benchmark data (I've changed that now, to be able to check on a day-per-day basis). Is there a way to check out a Python CVS version dated 2003-02-24 ? I could then give that a try again. > Maybe this checkin to ceval.c backfired? > > ---------------------------- > revision 2.351 > date: 2003/02/26 18:11:50; author: rhettinger; state: Exp; lines: +18 -4 > Micro-optimizations. > * List/Tuple checkexact is faster for the common case. > * Testing for Py_True and Py_False can be inlined for faster looping. > ---------------------------- Could be. I don't think inlining in ceval will help. The switch is too long already and it's much better to let the compiler/processor decide which parts should really get inlined since they have more knowledge about the platform than we do (sometimes :-). -- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Software directly from the Source (#1, Feb 27 2003) >>> Python/Zope Products & Consulting ... http://www.egenix.com/ >>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ... http://python.egenix.com/ ________________________________________________________________________ Python UK 2003, Oxford: 33 days left EuroPython 2003, Charleroi, Belgium: 117 days left
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