Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 12:17 AM, Alain Ketterlin > <al...@dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr> wrote: >> "E.D.G." <edgrs...@ix.netcom.com> writes: >> >>> The calculation speed question just involves relatively simple >>> math such as multiplications and divisions and trig calculations such >>> as sin and tan etc. >> >> These are not "simple" computations. >> >> Any compiled language (Fortran, C, C++, typically) will probably go much >> faster than any interpreted/bytecode-based language (like python or >> perl, anything that does not use a jit). > > Well, they may not be simple to do, but chances are you can push the > work down to the CPU/FPU on most modern hardware - that is, if you're > working with IEEE floating point, which I'm pretty sure CPython always > does; not sure about other Pythons. No need to actually calculate trig > functions unless you need arbitrary precision (and even then, I'd bet > the GMP libraries have that all sewn up for you). So the language > doesn't make a lot of difference.
Well, sure, yes, I agree with you and hope they are left to the FP engine (still, fp ops are often multi-cycle, but that's a minor point). But what I meant was: a (bytecode) interpreted program will always be slower than a compiled program, probably by an order of magnitude when doing number crunching. -- Alain. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
