Donovan Baarda <a...@minkirri.apana.org.au> added the comment:
Some points to note; I first noticed this as an apparently 5x performance regression for randrange() between pypy and pypy3. This seemed pretty significant, but admittedly the difference is largely masked by other python overheads when comparing python2 and python3. When I mentioned random() is faster, I meant that python2's implementation of randrange() that uses random() under the hood was noticeably faster than python3's randrange() that uses getrandbits() under the hood. I know getrandbits() is significantly faster than randrange(), but randrange() doesn't have to be that bad. However, I agree that changing repeatability is potentially a big issue. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue43040> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
