Right. I think that the geometric average is useful mostly and primarily to gather how PyPy is improving over time, and much less to know whether it has yet reached the speed of light as compared to CPython ;-)
2011/7/21 Maciej Fijalkowski <fij...@gmail.com>: > On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 7:17 AM, Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> wrote: >> Massa, Harald Armin, 18.07.2011 23:30: >>> >>> I recommend to wrap the code and release it with the subtitle "the 4 times >>> faster release" >> >> Just nitpicking here, but you shouldn't forget that any given set of >> benchmarks can only ever be an arbitrary one. If you change the current set, >> you can rightfully make any claim from "PyPy is 100x faster than CPython on >> average" to "CPython is substantially faster than PyPy". Taking the average >> is a nice addition right below the graphs on speed.pypy.org, but makes no >> sense at all without this context. > > Of course :) > > No single number would ever describe the speed of something as complex > as a python interpreter (unless the number is 42 of course). However, > there were request to reduce it to that and here we have one. I don't > think "4x faster now!" is a good marketing slogan even. What's > significant however is that it's getting faster with each release. > > Cheers, > fijal > _______________________________________________ > pypy-dev mailing list > pypy-dev@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev > _______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
