Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> added the comment:
Original: $ ./python -m timeit -s 'd = list(range(2**61, 2**61 + 10000))' 'sum(d)' 500 loops, best of 5: 712 usec per loop $ ./python -m timeit -s 'd = list(range(2**30, 2**30 + 10000))' 'sum(d)' 2000 loops, best of 5: 149 usec per loop $ ./python -m timeit -s 'd = list(range(2**29, 2**29 + 10000))' 'sum(d)' 2000 loops, best of 5: 107 usec per loop $ ./python -m timeit -s 'd = list(range(10000))' 'sum(d)' 2000 loops, best of 5: 107 usec per loop New: $ ./python -m timeit -s 'd = list(range(2**61, 2**61 + 10000))' 'sum(d)' 500 loops, best of 5: 713 usec per loop $ ./python -m timeit -s 'd = list(range(2**30, 2**30 + 10000))' 'sum(d)' 2000 loops, best of 5: 148 usec per loop $ ./python -m timeit -s 'd = list(range(2**29, 2**29 + 10000))' 'sum(d)' 5000 loops, best of 5: 77.4 usec per loop $ ./python -m timeit -s 'd = list(range(10000))' 'sum(d)' 5000 loops, best of 5: 77.2 usec per loop Seems to be 28% faster for the single digit case and exactly as fast as before with larger integers. Note that these are not PGO builds. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue24076> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
