I am not sure, but soon, I will be a great fan of your work, once I get to work on this! Thank your for inspiring me to work on these stuff! Best regards, Annapoornima On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 11:33 PM, Victor Stinner <victor.stinner@gmail.com> wrote:
2016-12-09 18:46 GMT+01:00 Victor Stinner <victor.stinner@gmail.com>:
Last days, I patched functions of PyObject_CallFunction() family to use internally fast calls. (...) http://bugs.python.org/issue28915
Oh, I forgot to mention the performance results of these changes. Python slots are now a little bit faster. Extract of the issue: http://bugs.python.org/issue28915#msg282748
Microbenchmark on a simple class with an __int__() method, call int(o): int(o): Median +- std dev: [ref] 239 ns +- 13 ns -> [patch] 219 ns +- 14 ns: 1.10x faster (-9%)
Microbenchmark on a simple class with an __getitem__() method, call o[100]: o[100]: Median +- std dev: [ref] 211 ns +- 11 ns -> [patch] 172 ns +- 11 ns: 1.23x faster (-19%)
Comparison between Python 2.7, 3.5, 3.7 and 3.7+patch, 3.5 is used as the reference:
int(o) ======
Median +- std dev: [3.5] 271 ns +- 15 ns -> [3.7] 239 ns +- 13 ns: 1.13x faster (-12%) Median +- std dev: [3.5] 271 ns +- 15 ns -> [patch] 219 ns +- 14 ns: 1.24x faster (-19%) Median +- std dev: [3.5] 271 ns +- 15 ns -> [2.7] 401 ns +- 21 ns: 1.48x slower (+48%)
o[100] ======
Median +- std dev: [3.5] 206 ns +- 5 ns -> [3.7] 211 ns +- 11 ns: 1.02x slower (+2%) Not significant! Median +- std dev: [3.5] 206 ns +- 5 ns -> [patch] 172 ns +- 11 ns: 1.20x faster (-17%) Median +- std dev: [3.5] 206 ns +- 5 ns -> [2.7] 254 ns +- 15 ns: 1.23x slower (+23%)
Victor _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/ annakoppad%40gmail.com