Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.redatomik.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.001 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'interpreter': 0.05; 'python)': 0.05; 'attribute': 0.07; 'debug': 0.07; 'pypy': 0.07; 'lookup': 0.09; 'shame': 0.09; 'slow.': 0.09; 'python': 0.11; 'def': 0.12; 'windows': 0.15; 'bytecode': 0.16; 'complicated,': 0.16; 'creation.': 0.16; 'different,': 0.16; 'discrepancy': 0.16; 'from:addr:mrabarnett.plus.com': 0.16; 'from:addr:python': 0.16; 'from:name:mrab': 0.16; 'lookups': 0.16; 'message- id:@mrabarnett.plus.com': 0.16; 'received:192.168.1.4': 0.16; 'seconds.': 0.16; 'simpler,': 0.16; 'such,': 0.16; 'ways:': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; '(not': 0.18; 'variable': 0.18; 'seems': 0.21; '(the': 0.22; '>>>': 0.22; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.23; '2.x': 0.24; 'versions': 0.24; "haven't": 0.24; 'nearly': 0.26; 'header :In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'array': 0.29; 'fastest': 0.30; 'mode': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; 'code': 0.31; 'apparently': 0.31; 'int,': 0.31; 'languages': 0.32; 'quite': 0.32; 'are:': 0.33; 'guess': 0.33; 'test': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'version': 0.36; 'explains': 0.36; 'ubuntu': 0.36; 'doing': 0.36; 'method': 0.36; 'seconds': 0.37; 'two': 0.37; 'starting': 0.37; 'mine': 0.38; 'to:addr:python- list': 0.38; 'anything': 0.39; 'does': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'tell': 0.60; 'new': 0.61; 'simple': 0.61; 'first': 0.61; 'making': 0.63; 'within': 0.65; 'between': 0.67; 'obvious': 0.74; '100%': 0.77; '100': 0.79; '*simple*': 0.84; 'timings': 0.84; '9.2': 0.91 X-CM-Score: 0.00 X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=DZWZq5dW c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=0nF1XD0wxitMEM03M9B4ZQ==:117 a=0nF1XD0wxitMEM03M9B4ZQ==:17 a=0Bzu9jTXAAAA:8 a=SY9aFQKHIdAA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=EBOSESyhAAAA:8 a=5ANokUeuAAAA:8 a=bUxbpLKClOnPkN3vPEQA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 X-AUTH: mrabarnett@:2500 Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 23:19:24 +0100 From: MRAB User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: Building CPython References: <7JN4x.37133$Q41.15375@fx25.am4> <6w35x.645690$I97.19867@fx31.am4> <874mnfunpn.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 54 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1431641969 news.xs4all.nl 2961 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:59641 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:90633 On 2015-05-14 22:55, BartC wrote: > On 14/05/2015 17:29, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: >> BartC : >> >>> That's a shame because I wanted to tinker with the main dispatcher >>> loop to try and find out what exactly is making it slow. Nothing that >>> seems obvious at first sight. >> >> My guess is the main culprit is attribute lookup in two ways: >> >> * Each object attribute reference involves a dictionary lookup. >> >> * Each method call involves *two* dictionary lookups plus an object >> creation. >> >> Tell us what you find out. > > I'm just starting but I can tell you that it isn't because debug mode > (Py_DEBUG defined) was left on by mistake! > > What is interesting however is that on the very simple test I'm doing (a > while loop incrementing a variable up to 100 million), the timings under > Windows are: > > Python 2.5 9.2 seconds > Python 3.1 13.1 > Python 3.4.3 17.0 > Python 3.4.3 14.3 (under Ubuntu on same machine, using the version > I built today) > > That's quite a big range! > > PyPy does it in 0.7 seconds. The same program within my own *simple* > bytecode interpreter (not for Python) has a fastest time of 1.5 seconds > but makes use of ASM. A version 100% in (gcc) C can manage 2 seconds. > > So far I haven't find anything that explains the discrepancy (the > languages are different, mine is simpler, but the Python code isn't > doing anything that complicated, only LOAD_FASTs and such, and LOAD_FAST > is apparently just an array access. > > But the nearly 2:1 difference between new and old Python versions is > also intriguing. > > def whiletest(): > i=0 > while i<=100000000: > i=i+1 > > whiletest() > Python 2.x has int and long; Python 3 has int, which is the old 'long'. Try Python 2 with longs.