Yury Selivanov added the comment: Best of 5s:
-m timeit -s "r = range(10**4)" -- "for i in r: pass" orig: 239 usec my patch: 148 int_free_list_2: 151 int_free_list_multi: 156 -m timeit -s "r = range(10**5)" -- "for i in r: pass" orig: 2.4 msec my patch: 1.47 int_free_list_2: 1.53 int_free_list_multi: 1.57 -m timeit -s "a = list(range(10**4))" -- "for i, x in enumerate(a): pass" orig: 416 usec my: 314 int_free_list_2: 314 int_free_list_multi: 317 -m timeit -s "a = list(range(10**5))" -- "for i, x in enumerate(a): pass" orig: 4.1 msec my: 3.13 int_free_list_2: 3.14 int_free_list_multi: 3.13 -m timeit -s "from base64 import b85encode; a = bytes(range(256))*100" -- "b85encode(a)" orig: 3.49 msec my: 3.28 int_free_list_2: 3.30 int_free_list_multi: 3.31 -m timeit -s "loops=tuple(range(1000))" "for x in loops: x+x" orig: 44.4 usec my: 35.2 int_free_list_2: 35.4 int_free_list_multi: 35.5 spectral_norm (against default): my: 1.12x faster int_free_list_2: 1.12x faster int_free_list_multi: 1.12x faster ========== All in all, all patches show the same performance improvement. I guess we can go with int_free_list_multi. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue24165> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
