Mc Osten wrote: > Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Python's memory allocator is also quite fast, compared to most generic > > allocators... > > In fact also in the two "slow" versions Python outperforms C++. > I didn't notice it in the first place. >
But your C++ program outputs times in seconds, right? So all compilations except for the first two give results in less than a second, right? (meaning the optimizations of your standard-compilation give worst results than -O3?) BTW, I don't quite understand your gcc optimizations for the first 2 compiles anyways: two -O options with different values. Doesn't that mean the 2nd -O takes preference, and the compilation is at -O2 instead of -O3? Why both -O3 and -O2 at the command-line? Cheers, --Tim > -- > blog: http://www.akropolix.net/rik0/blogs | Uccidete i filosofi, > site: http://www.akropolix.net/rik0/ | tenetevi riso e > forum: http://www.akropolix.net/forum/ | bacchette per voi. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list