Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #90393

Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it?

References (1 earlier) <fNP3x.641427$3i4.583649@fx29.am4> <555028d8$0$12997$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <8Y_3x.668959$LI3.568865@fx24.am4> <mailman.365.1431353538.12865.python-list@python.org> <zv34x.521800$lV1.472319@fx05.am4>
Date 2015-05-11 10:13 -0500
Subject Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it?
From Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Message-ID <mailman.369.1431357228.12865.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw


On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 10:01 AM, BartC <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
> (1) It has an extra argument ('code'), in addition to any normal arguments
> of func (0 in this case)

Which might well push execution down the unoptimized code path. Also,
ISTR that Steven's original timeit runs tacked on a standalone "eval ;
..." to the function call case, so the LOAD_GLOBAL bytecode would have
been done in the function call case as well. He was, I think, doing
what he could to make the two cases as nearly identical as he could.

Skip

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-05-10 19:58 +1000
  Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2015-05-10 12:34 +0200
    Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-05-11 01:04 +1000
  Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2015-05-10 12:43 +0200
    Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-05-11 00:49 +1000
      Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2015-05-10 18:14 +0200
      Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-05-10 10:25 -0600
  Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-05-10 12:37 -0400
  Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-10 22:08 +0100
    Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-05-11 13:58 +1000
      Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-11 10:50 +0100
        Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 09:12 -0500
          Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-05-11 16:01 +0100
            Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2015-05-11 10:13 -0500
      Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Tony the Tiger <tony@tiger.invalid> - 2015-05-15 01:35 +0000
  Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2015-05-11 08:11 +0200
  Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? Piet van Oostrum <piet@vanoostrum.org> - 2015-06-22 23:49 +0200

csiph-web