>>> 4% on a micro-micro-benchmark is hardly compelling... >> >> I concur! This is utterly insignificant and certainly does >> not warrant removing the checks. >> >> -1 on these sort of fake optimizations. We should focus >> on algorithmic improvements and eliminating redundant >> work and whatnot. Removing checks that were put there for a reason >> doesn't seem useful at all. > > To be fair, the main proposed optimization(s) would speed up the > microbenchmark by 15-25% (Daniel already stated that the NULL checks > didn't have a significant impact). This seems significant, > considering that tight loops whose cost is heavily due to array access > are common. I thought people used PyList_GET_ITEM or something similar in those use situations. Raymond
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