A Monday 11 February 2008, Francesc Altet escrigué:

> A Monday 11 February 2008, Charles R Harris escrigué:

Mmm, comparing my new strncmp and the one that you have implemented in
SVN, I've found a difference that can account for part of the
difference in performances.  With your version of strncmp in SVN
(compare_string), these are my timings with the Opteron server:

In [17]: np.random.seed(1)

In [18]: a = np.random.rand(10000).astype('S8')

In [19]: %timeit a.copy().sort()
100 loops, best of 3: 3.86 ms per loop

In [20]: %timeit newqsort(a.copy())
100 loops, best of 3: 3.44 ms per loop

which gives times a 5% worse.  Try to use my version and tell me if it
does better:

static int inline
opt_strncmp(char *a, char *b, size_t n)
{
   size_t i;
   unsigned char c, d;

   for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {

       c = a[i]; d = b[i];
       if (c != d) return c - d;
   }
   return 0;
}