Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail From: Mark Lawrence Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: Re: Pyhon 2.x or 3.x, which is faster? Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 08:40:15 +0000 Lines: 28 Message-ID: References: <87d1r6iltx.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <56df6761$0$1588$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de SKjmWI1bbLHlNMfK0LjIMggqMnSA0ixvvMyPzO6HXusw== Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.002 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'from:addr:yahoo.co.uk': 0.05; 'pypy': 0.07; 'start-up': 0.07; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'subject:which': 0.09; 'vast': 0.09; 'python': 0.10; 'wed,': 0.15; '2016': 0.16; 'frankly': 0.16; 'grasp': 0.16; 'input.': 0.16; 'opposite': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:io': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'received:psf.io': 0.16; 'slow,': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'language': 0.19; 'lawrence': 0.22; 'file.': 0.22; 'trying': 0.22; 'am,': 0.23; 'seems': 0.23; 'header :In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; "i've": 0.25; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.26; 'sense': 0.26; 'switch': 0.27; 'tail': 0.29; "i'm": 0.30; 'seconds': 0.31; "can't": 0.32; 'language.': 0.32; "d'aprano": 0.33; 'steven': 0.33; 'surely': 0.33; 'quite': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'too': 0.36; 'to:addr:python- list': 0.36; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'received:org': 0.37; 'one,': 0.37; 'seem': 0.37; 'doing': 0.38; 'takes': 0.39; 'rather': 0.39; 'well.': 0.40; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'mark': 0.40; 'called': 0.40; 'hang': 0.60; 'care': 0.60; 'charset:windows-1252': 0.62; 'matter': 0.63; 'our': 0.64; 'mar': 0.65; 'here': 0.66; '180': 0.84; 'banging': 0.84; 'benchmark': 0.84; 'hardly': 0.84; 'pythonistas,': 0.84 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.234.129.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 In-Reply-To: <56df6761$0$1588$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:104395 On 08/03/2016 23:59, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 06:15 am, BartC wrote: > > [...] >> But this was hardly necessary as it was so obvious: it takes 150ms to >> process a 300-pixel image, 20 seconds for a 2Mpixel one, and (I have to >> switch to PyPy here as I've never had time to hang about for it) 180 >> seconds for 80Mpixel file. >> >> Surely the start-up time would be the same no matter what the input. > > > Mark seems to think that it's completely irrelevant, but that's surely wrong. > The exact opposite actually. I'm trying to make sense of these so called benchmark figures, and quite frankly can't make head nor tail of them. BartC also cannot seem to grasp that the vast majority of people often couldn't care less about them, but continues banging on as if Python will never take off as it's too slow, whereas the reality is that it's been doing rather well. -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence