Antoine Pitrou added the comment: > For this benchmark the call overhead does not seem to be noticeable, > and using larger or adaptive read buffers does not seem to help > either. (I have tried both on Linux.)
Ok, thank you. > > By the way, not every non-Windows OS is Linux, so the patch is wrong. > > Wrong in the sense of not necessarily optimal for unknown platforms? > Well, the patch retains the old (intended) behaviour on other > platforms, so I would call that conservative rather than wrong. Hmm, you are right, there is no regression indeed. I guess I don't like very much the idea of switching code paths based on the platform for pure optimization reasons, but in this case it seems useful (and simple enough). > Are you suggesting switching behaviour depending on whether some macro > is defined? No, that would definitely be overkill. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15758> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
