On Mon, 06 May 2013, Sebastian Berg wrote: > > if you care to tune it up/extend and then I could fire it up again on > > that box (which doesn't do anything else ATM AFAIK). Since majority of > > time is spent actually building it (did it with ccache though) it would > > be neat if you come up with more of benchmarks to run which you might > > think could be interesting/important.
> I think this is pretty cool! Probably would be a while until there are > many tests, but if you or someone could set such thing up it could > slowly grow when larger code changes are done? that is the idea but it would be nice to gather such simple benchmark-tests. if you could hint on the numpy functionality you think especially worth benchmarking (I know -- there is a lot of things which could be set to be benchmarked) -- that would be a nice starting point: just list functionality/functions you consider of primary interest. and either it is worth testing for different types or just a gross estimate (e.g. for the selection of types in a loop) As for myself -- I guess I will add fancy indexing and slicing tests. Adding them is quite easy: have a look at https://github.com/yarikoptic/numpy-vbench/blob/master/vb_reduce.py which is actually a bit more cumbersome because of running them for different types. This one is more obvious: https://github.com/yarikoptic/numpy-vbench/blob/master/vb_io.py -- Yaroslav O. Halchenko, Ph.D. http://neuro.debian.net http://www.pymvpa.org http://www.fail2ban.org Senior Research Associate, Psychological and Brain Sciences Dept. Dartmouth College, 419 Moore Hall, Hinman Box 6207, Hanover, NH 03755 Phone: +1 (603) 646-9834 Fax: +1 (603) 646-1419 WWW: http://www.linkedin.com/in/yarik _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
