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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #81553

Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt

Show key headers only | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

Another _possible_ performance improvement that is staring us in the face
is that 2*b could be replaced with b<<1. Given that b+b (an earlier
suggestion of mine) involves two table look-ups for b, whereas b<<1 only
involves one, it seems that the scope here for improvement is significant.

By the way, I hope this post is not "top-posted" as my previous one was.
Apologies for that - I am new to this kind of thing.



On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:46 AM, Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> wrote:

> On 11/25/2014 02:31 PM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
>
>> п'ятниця, 21-лис-2014 08:15:57 ви написали:
>>
>>> This looks very good indeed. As a matter of interest, is there any
>>> particular reason you have used 2*b instead of b+b? Might b+b be faster
>>> than b*2?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, it is slightly faster, but the effect is indiscernible in total
>> time. But
>> there is not harm to use b+b.
>>
>>  Also, in various lines, you use //2. Would >>1 be quicker? On reflection,
>>> perhaps you have had to use //2 because >>1 cannot be used in those
>>> situations.
>>>
>>
>> I thought this effect would be insignificant too. But actually it is
>> measurable
>> (about 10% for some input). Thanks, this optimization is worth to be
>> applied.
>>
>>
> Unfortunately, for many values, the version of the function with >>1 is
> slower.  It's only when the argument is bigger than 10**40 that it's as
> much as 1% faster.  But it's true that for really large values, it's
> quicker.
>
> A quick test shows that 3.3 is about 20% faster for both these functions
> than 2.7.
>
> My oversight earlier was assuming a native type.  Once you get into
> "longs" which aren't supported by the processor, the shift will likely
> become much faster than divide.
>
>
> --
> DaveA
> --
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>

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

Thread

Challenge: optimizing isqrt Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-11-01 12:29 +1100
  Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-11-01 13:12 +1100
  Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-11-01 09:02 +0100
    Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-11-01 09:09 +0100
    Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-11-01 19:13 +1100
      Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-11-01 09:25 +0100
        Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-11-01 19:33 +1100
          Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2014-11-01 09:38 +0100
            Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-11-01 19:45 +1100
  Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2014-11-01 12:12 +0300
  Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> - 2014-11-20 20:00 +0200
  Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Stephen Tucker <stephen_tucker@sil.org> - 2014-11-21 08:15 +0000
  Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-11-23 10:43 -0500
  Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> - 2014-11-25 21:31 +0200
  Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-11-25 19:46 -0500
  Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Stephen Tucker <stephen_tucker@sil.org> - 2014-11-26 07:57 +0000
    Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-11-26 21:25 +1100
  Re: Challenge: optimizing isqrt Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> - 2014-11-26 18:24 +0200

csiph-web