On 01/04/2013 21:28, jmfauth wrote:
On 1 avr, 21:28, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 6:15 AM, jmfauth <wxjmfa...@gmail.com> wrote:
Py32
import timeit
timeit.repeat("'a' * 1000 + 'ẞ'")
[0.7005365263669056, 0.6810694766790423, 0.6811978680727229]
timeit.repeat("'a' * 1000 + 'z'")
[0.7105829560031083, 0.6904999426964764, 0.6938637184431968]
Py33
import timeit
timeit.repeat("'a' * 1000 + 'ẞ'")
[1.1484035160337613, 1.1233738895227505, 1.1215708962703874]
timeit.repeat("'a' * 1000 + 'z'")
[0.6640958193635527, 0.6469043692851528, 0.6458961423900007]
This is what's called a microbenchmark. Can you show me any instance
in production code where an operation like this is done repeatedly, in
a time-critical place? It's a contrived example, and it's usually
possible to find regressions in any system if you fiddle enough with
the example. Do you have, for instance, a web server that can handle
1000 tps on 3.2 and only 600 tps on 3.3, all other things being equal?
ChrisA
-----
Of course this is an example, as many I gave. Examples you may find in
apps.
You've given many examples of the same type of micro benchmark, not many
examples of different types of benchmark.
Can you point and give at least a bunch of examples, showing
there is no regression, at least to contradict me. The only
one I succeed to see (in month), is the one given by Steven, a status
quo.
Once again you deliberately choose to ignore the memory saving and
correctness to concentrate on the performance slowdown in some cases.
I will happily accept them. The only think I read is "this is faster",
"it has been tested", ...
I do not believe that you will ever accept any facts unless you yourself
provide them.
jmf
--
If you're using GoogleCrap™ please read this
http://wiki.python.org/moin/GoogleGroupsPython.
Mark Lawrence
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
