Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #90281
| From | Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Subject | Re: Calling a function is faster than not calling it? |
| Date | 2015-05-10 12:34 +0200 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <minc6e$loc$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <554f2bb6$0$13011$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
Am 10.05.15 um 11:58 schrieb Steven D'Aprano:
> Why is calling a function faster than bypassing the function object and
> evaluating the code object itself? And not by a little, but by a lot?
>
> Here I have a file, eval_test.py:
>
> # === cut ===
> from timeit import Timer
>
> def func():
> a = 2
> b = 3
> c = 4
> return (a+b)*(a-b)/(a*c + b*c)
>
>
> code = func.__code__
> assert func() == eval(code)
>
> t1 = Timer("eval; func()", setup="from __main__ import func")
> t2 = Timer("eval(code)", setup="from __main__ import code")
>
> # Best of 10 trials.
> print (min(t1.repeat(repeat=10)))
> print (min(t2.repeat(repeat=10)))
what exactly does this mean, are you calling it 10 times? Are you sure
hat is enaough to reach the granularity of your clock? A benchmark
should last at least 100ms IMHO.
> # === cut ===
>
>
> Note that both tests include a name lookup for eval, so that as much as
> possible I am comparing the two pieces of code on an equal footing.
>
> Here are the results I get:
>
>
> [steve@ando ~]$ python2.7 eval_test.py
> 0.804041147232
> 1.74012994766
> [steve@ando ~]$ python3.3 eval_test.py
> 0.7233301624655724
> 1.7154695875942707
>
> Directly eval'ing the code object is easily more than twice as expensive
> than calling the function, but calling the function has to eval the code
> object. That suggests that the overhead of calling the function is
> negative, which is clearly ludicrous.
>
> I knew that calling eval() on a string was slow, as it has to parse and
> compile the source code into byte code before it can evaluate it, but this
> is pre-compiled and shouldn't have that overhead.
Does eval(code) lookup a,b and c in the scope of the eval, whereas in
the func it is bound to locals and optimized out?
I've got no idea of Python's internals, just guessing.
Christian
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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