PyPy 1.0: JIT compilers for free and more

Duncan Booth duncan.booth at invalid.invalid
Thu Mar 29 13:58:34 CEST 2007


Robin Becker <robin at reportlab.com> wrote:

> I am hugely encouraged by this
> 
> C:\Python\devel\pypy-1.0.0>\python24\python \python\lib\test
\pystone.py
> Pystone(1.1) time for 50000 passes = 1.49586
> This machine benchmarks at 33425.6 pystones/second
> 
> C:\Python\devel\pypy-1.0.0>.\pypy-c.exe \python\lib\test\pystone.py
> Pystone(1.1) time for 50000 passes = 2.16123e-005
> This machine benchmarks at 2.3135e+009 pystones/second
> 
> 
>:) not

It looks like time.clock() is completely borked.

C:\work\pypy-1.0.0>\python25\python
Python 2.5 (r25:51908, Sep 19 2006, 09:52:17) [MSC v.1310 32 bit 
(Intel)] on win
32
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> from time import clock, sleep
>>> clock(); sleep(3); clock()
1.6203176660720846e-005
3.000427987355935
>>> clock(); sleep(3); clock()
8.2580051375244619
11.258311321690327
>>> clock(); sleep(3); clock()
16.283118664523005
19.283642753478446
>>> ^Z


C:\work\pypy-1.0.0>pypy-c
Python 2.4.1 (pypy 1.0.0 build 41438) on win32
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>>> from time import clock, sleep
>>>> clock(); sleep(3); clock()
1.0000000000337512
1.0000050338639583
>>>> clock(); sleep(3); clock()
1.0000103837992871
1.0000154196831568
>>>>

Or perhaps it is simply telling you the sort of speeds it hopes to reach 
some day (I wouldn't say no to  9.16021e+009 pystones/second if that was 
what it actually did).



More information about the Python-list mailing list