On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 18:36:33 +0000 Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > Are we happy with the current benchmarks? Are there some we want to drop? > How about add? Do we want to have explanations as to why each benchmark is > included?
There are no real explanations except the provenance of said benchmarks: - the benchmarks suite was originally developed for Unladen Swallow - some benchmarks were taken and adapted from the "Great Computer Language Shootout" (which I think is a poor source of benchmarks) - some benchmarks have been added for specific concerns that may not be of enough interest in general (for example micro-benchmarks of methods calls, or benchmarks of json / pickle performance) > A better balance of micro vs. macro benchmarks (and probably > matching groups)? Easier said than done :-) Macro-benchmarks are harder to write, especially with the constraints that 1) runtimes should be short enough for convenient use 2) performance numbers should be stable enough accross runs. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Speed mailing list Speed@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/speed
