2011/10/7 Vitja Makarov <[email protected]>: > 2011/10/7 Stefan Behnel <[email protected]>: >> Vitja Makarov, 06.10.2011 23:12: >>> >>> Here is small comparison on compiling urllib.py with cython: >>> >>> ((e8527c5...)) vitja@mchome:~/work/cython-vitek-git/zzz$ time python >>> ../cython.py urllib.py >>> >>> real 0m1.699s >>> user 0m1.650s >>> sys 0m0.040s >>> (master) vitja@mchome:~/work/cython-vitek-git/zzz$ time python >>> ../cython.py urllib.py >>> >>> real 0m2.830s >>> user 0m2.790s >>> sys 0m0.030s >>> >>> >>> It's about 1.5 times slower. >> >> I assume this uses a compiled Cython? That's a pretty serious regression for >> plain Python code then. Again, this needs proper profiling. >> > > No, that was pure python cython. >
I've added return statement on top of CythonScope.test_cythonscope, now I have these timings: (master) vitja@mchome:~/work/cython-vitek-git/zzz$ time python ../cython.py urllib.py real 0m1.764s user 0m1.700s sys 0m0.060s >> We may also want to disable certain steps in the pipeline based on the >> syntax features used. If a feature is not used that has its own (set of) >> visitors, we can disable them completely. Detection already happens based on >> the .pyx/.py distinction, but could additionally use a detector (e.g. in the >> post-parse phase) that sets up skip flags. One example is the closure >> building step, which could be skipped if there are no closures. >> > > > One more think I've found is that many unused utilities are loaded. > -- vitja. _______________________________________________ cython-devel mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/cython-devel
