Mikkel Krøigård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> It only used 0.5 seconds of its own time -- the 21 seconds are the >> total time spend in the child-calls made by inc_pc_wrapper. Since >> it wraps all important functions its clear that the cumulative time >> will be big: >> >> ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall >> 48003/6003 0.518 0.000 21.195 0.004 >> >> But any optimization would be good -- if we can same a tiny bit for >> each of the 48000 calls it might sum up :-) > > My observation was just that wrapping is somewhat expensive. I do > not quite know what to do about this. We have already discussed the > alternatives to using this method, and they were not particularly > promising.
Function calls are unfortunately quite expensive in Python. One idea is to use Psyco (http://tracker.viff.dk/issue51) since it supposedly should be able to write optimized code on the fly, maybe even do inlining -- I'm not sure. -- Martin Geisler _______________________________________________ viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) [email protected] http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk
