STINNER Victor <victor.stin...@gmail.com> added the comment: Attached bench_ignore_warn.py: microbenchmark (using the perf module) to measure the performance of emitting a warning when the warning is ignored.
I added two basic optimizations to my PR 4489. With these optimizations, the slowdown is +17% on such microbenchmark: $ ./python -m perf compare_to ref.json patch.json Mean +- std dev: [ref] 903 ns +- 70 ns -> [patch] 1.06 us +- 0.06 us: 1.17x slower (+17%) The slowdown was much larger without optimizations, +42%: $ ./python -m perf compare_to ref.json ignore.json Mean +- std dev: [ref] 881 ns +- 59 ns -> [ignore] 1.25 us +- 0.08 us: 1.42x slower (+42%) About the memory vs CPU tradeoff, we are talking around ~1000 ns. IMHO 1000 ns is "cheap" (fast) and emitting warnings is a rare event Python. I prefer to make warnings slower than "leaking" memory (current behaviour: warnings registry growing with no limit). ---------- Added file: https://bugs.python.org/file47282/bench_ignore_warn.py _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue27535> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
