RetroSearch Browse

Wed Aug 31 01:21:18 CEST 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-August/113386.html

On Aug 30, 2011, at 9:05 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 13:29:59 +1000
>> Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Anecdotal, non-reproducible performance figures are *not* the way to
>>> go about serious optimisation efforts.
>> 
>> What about anecdotal *and* reproducible performance figures? :)
>> I may be half-joking, but we already have a set of py3k-compatible
>> benchmarks and, besides, sometimes a timeit invocation gives a good
>> idea of whether an approach is fruitful or not.
>> While a permanent public reference with historical tracking of
>> performance figures is even better, let's not freeze everything until
>> it's ready.
>> (for example, do we need to wait for speed.python.org before PEP 393 is
>> accepted?)
> 
> Yeah, I'd neglected the idea of just running perf.py for pre- and
> post-patch performance comparisons. You're right that that can
> generate sufficient info to make a well-informed decision.
> 
> I'd still really like it if some of the people advocating that we care
> about CPython performance actually volunteered to spearhead the effort
> to get speed.python.org up and running, though. As far as I know, the
> hardware's spinning idly waiting to be given work to do :P
> 
> Cheers,
> Nick.
> 

Discussion of speed.python.org should happen on the mailing list for that project if possible.

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-August/113386.html below:

[Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations continued...