Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 09:19:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3504.1345387683.4697.python-list@python.org>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.79.89.25; posting-account=ung4FAoAAAC46zhHJ0Nsnuox7M5gDvs_
References: <f801e06f-f7b2-4aca-b352-66856a939746@googlegroups.com> <mailman.3457.1345305136.4697.python-list@python.org> <4c62a649-bc21-4e47-9c0f-acb1b1e70e36@googlegroups.com> <mailman.3462.1345310859.4697.python-list@python.org> <f9beca36-3a12-41f2-bdc2-95b159c162d1@googlegroups.com> <mailman.3468.1345314897.4697.python-list@python.org> <5030891f$0$29978$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.3485.1345362201.4697.python-list@python.org> <5030aa44$0$29978$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.3489.1345369039.4697.python-list@python.org> <11931ec9-1858-4ae8-8a61-1d154d105229@googlegroups.com> <mailman.3492.1345372006.4697.python-list@python.org> <73c85f3b-a4a9-4812-bc41-132b5126874c@googlegroups.com> <mailman.3497.1345379387.4697.python-list@python.org> <1f22cebc-71aa-4881-bac5-d97d72fe2633@googlegroups.com> <mailman.3501.1345383872.4697.python-list@python.org> <f6de81c6-2965-42dd-a789-0770a019c038@googlegroups.com> <mailman.3504.1345387683.4697.python-list@python.org>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: New internal string format in 3.3
From: wxjmfauth@gmail.com
To: comp.lang.python@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: python-list@python.org
Precedence: list
Message-ID: <mailman.3507.1345393173.4697.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 116
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:27396

Le dimanche 19 ao=FBt 2012 16:48:48 UTC+2, Mark Lawrence a =E9crit=A0:
> On 19/08/2012 15:09, wxjmfauth@gmail.com wrote:
>=20
>=20
>=20
> >
>=20
> > I can not give you more numbers than those I gave.
>=20
> > As a end user, I noticed and experimented my random tests
>=20
> > are always slower in Py3.3 than in Py3.2 on my Windows platform.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Once again you refuse to supply anything to back up what you say.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> >
>=20
> > It is up to you, the core developers to give an explanation
>=20
> > about this behaviour.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Core developers cannot give an explanation for something that doesn't=20
>=20
> exist, except in your imagination.  Unless you can produce the evidence=
=20
>=20
> that supports your claims, including details of OS, benchmarks used and=
=20
>=20
> so on and so forth.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> >
>=20
> > As I understand a little bit the coding of the characters,
>=20
> > I pointed out, this is most probably due to this flexible
>=20
> > string representation (with arguments appearing randomly
>=20
> > in the misc. messages, mainly latin-1).
>=20
> >
>=20
> > I can not do more.
>=20
> >
>=20
> > (I stupidly spoke about factors 0.1 to ..., you should
>=20
> > read of course, 1.1,  to ...)
>=20
> >
>=20
> > jmf
>=20
> >
>=20
>=20
>=20
> I suspect that I'll be dead and buried long before you can produce=20
>=20
> anything concrete in the way of evidence.  I've thrown down the gauntlet=
=20
>=20
> several times, do you now have the courage to pick it up, or are you=20
>=20
> going to resort to the FUD approach that you've been using throughout=20
>=20
> this thread?
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
>=20
> Cheers.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Mark Lawrence.

I do not remember the tests I'have done at the 1st alpha release
time. It was with an interactive interpreter. I precisely pay
attention to test these chars you can find in the range 128..256
in all 8-bits coding schemes. Chars I suspected to be problematic.

Here a short test again, a random single test, the first
idea coming in my mind.

Py 3.2.3
>>> timeit.timeit("('a=9C=80'*100).replace('a', '=9C=80=E9')")
4.99396356635981

Py 3.3b2
>>> timeit.timeit("('a=9C=80'*100).replace('a', '=9C=80=E9')")
7.560455708007855

Maybe, not so demonstative. It shows at least, we
are far away from the 10-30% "annouced".

>>> 7.56 / 5
1.512
>>> 5 / (7.56 - 5) * 100
195.31250000000003


jmf