This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub ,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
| Author | pitrou |
|---|---|
| Recipients | lemburg, orivej, pitrou |
| Date | 2008年01月27日.15:35:35 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.3347257 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1201448142.84.0.527981260707.issue1943@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
With KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT = 200, the pybench runtime is basically the same as with my patched version. stringbench remains a bit faster though (~8%). You say that RAM size is cheaper than CPU power today, which is true but misses one part of the picture: the importance of CPU caches, and thus of working set size. There are also probably people wanting to use Python in memory-constrained environments (embedded). I understand the argument about possible optimizations with an external buffer, but are such optimizations likely to be implemented? (see #1590352 and #1629305). If they really are, then I'm happy with the unicode type remaining a plain PyObject! |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008年01月27日 15:35:43 | pitrou | set | spambayes_score: 0.334726 -> 0.3347257 recipients: + pitrou, lemburg, orivej |
| 2008年01月27日 15:35:42 | pitrou | set | spambayes_score: 0.334726 -> 0.334726 messageid: <1201448142.84.0.527981260707.issue1943@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2008年01月27日 15:35:36 | pitrou | link | issue1943 messages |
| 2008年01月27日 15:35:35 | pitrou | create | |