Fredrik Lundh wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> MAL's pybench would probably be better for this presuming it does some >> addition with string operands. >> > or stringbench. >
I ran 'em, and they are strangely consistent with pystone. With concat, stringbench is ever-so-slightly faster overall. "172.82" vs "174.85" for the "ascii" column, I guess that's in seconds. I'm just happy it's not slower. (I only ran stringbench once; it seems to take *forever*). I ran pybench three times for each build. The slowest concat overall time was still 2.9% faster than the fastest release time. "ConcatStrings" is a big winner, at around 150% faster; since the test doesn't *do* anything with the concatenated values, it never renders the concatenation objects, so it does a lot less work. "CreateStringsWithConcat" is generally 18-19% faster, as expected. After that, the timings are all over the place, but some tests were consistently faster: "CompareInternedStrings" was 8-12% faster, "DictWithFloatKeys" was 9-11% faster, "SmallLists" was 8-15% faster, "CompareLongs" was 6-10% faster, and "PyMethodCalls" was 4-6% faster. (These are all comparing the "average run-time" results, though the "minimum run-time" results were similar.) I still couldn't tell you why my results are faster. I swear on my mother's eyes I didn't touch anything major involved in "DictWithFloatKeys", "SmallLists", or "CompareLongs". I didn't touch the compiler settings, so that shouldn't be it. I acknowledge not only that it could all be a mistake, and that I don't know enough about it to speculate.// The speedup mystery continues, *larry* _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
