STINNER Victor added the comment: Results of benchmarks using compare_hash-3.patch:
$ time ../benchmarks/perf.py -r -b default ./pythonorig ./pythonhash INFO:root:Skipping benchmark slowspitfire; not compatible with Python 3.4 INFO:root:Skipping benchmark slowpickle; not compatible with Python 3.4 INFO:root:Skipping benchmark slowunpickle; not compatible with Python 3.4 INFO:root:Skipping benchmark spambayes; not compatible with Python 3.4 Running 2to3... Running django_v2... Report on Linux smithers 3.9.4-200.fc18.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri May 24 20:10:49 UTC 2013 x86_64 x86_64 Total CPU cores: 8 ### 2to3 ### Min: 6.358000 -> 6.055000: 1.05x faster Avg: 6.407600 -> 6.179800: 1.04x faster Significant (t=3.53) Stddev: 0.04311 -> 0.13785: 3.1979x larger ### nbody ### Min: 0.219029 -> 0.212477: 1.03x faster Avg: 0.224940 -> 0.219248: 1.03x faster Significant (t=10.13) Stddev: 0.00373 -> 0.00420: 1.1288x larger The following not significant results are hidden, use -v to show them: django_v2. At least, Python is not slower with the patch :-) I'm surprised that the benchmark shows a difference. nbody benchmark is focused on float numbers. I checked with gdb, nbody benchmark does not call any Unicode comparison function. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16286> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
