Dnia 28-09-2007, Pt o godzinie 18:58 +0200, Victor Stinner pisze:
> I don't know GMP internals. I thaught that GMP uses an hack for small
> integers.
It does not.
(And I'm glad that it does not, because it allows for super-specialized
representation of small integers where even the space for mpz
Hi,
I wrote another patch with two improvment: use small integer cache and use
Python memory allocation functions. Now GMP overhead (pystones result) is
only -2% and not -20% (previous patch).
Since the patch is huge, I prefer to leave copy on my server:
http://www.haypocalc.com/tmp/py3k-long_g
On Friday 28 September 2007 18:44:43 you wrote:
> > GMP doesn't have a concept of a non-complex structure. It always
> > allocates memory. (...)
I don't know GMP internals. I thaught that GMP uses an hack for small
integers.
> > Also, removing python's caching of integers < 100 as you did in thi
On 9/28/07, James Y Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sep 27, 2007, at 10:29 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I read some days ago a discussion about GMP (license). I wanted to
> > know if GMP
> > is really better than current Python int/long implementation. So I
> > wrote a
> > p
On Sep 27, 2007, at 10:29 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I read some days ago a discussion about GMP (license). I wanted to
> know if GMP
> is really better than current Python int/long implementation. So I
> wrote a
> patch for python 3000 subversion (rev. 58277).
>
> I changed long typ
