On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 20:29, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 20:15:25 +0200 > Eli Bendersky <eli...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Oops, readinto takes the same time as copying. This is a real shame, > > because readinto in conjunction with the buffer interface was supposed to > > avoid the redundant copy. > > > > Is there a real performance regression here, is this a well-known issue, > or > > am I just missing something obvious? > > Can you try with latest 3.3 (from the default branch)? > Sure. Updated the default branch just now and built: $1 -m timeit -s'import fileread_bytearray' 'fileread_bytearray.justread()' 1000 loops, best of 3: 1.14 msec per loop $1 -m timeit -s'import fileread_bytearray' 'fileread_bytearray.readandcopy()' 100 loops, best of 3: 2.78 msec per loop $1 -m timeit -s'import fileread_bytearray' 'fileread_bytearray.readinto()' 1000 loops, best of 3: 1.6 msec per loop Strange. Although here, like in python 2, the performance of readinto is close to justread and much faster than readandcopy, but justread itself is much slower than in 2.7 and 3.2! Eli
_______________________________________________ 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
