(original) (raw)

Do you say I and many people are so fool?

People use same algorithm on every language when compares base language

performance \[1\].

\[1\] There are no solid definition about "Base language performance".

But it includes function call, method lookup, GC. It may include basic string and arithmetic operations.

See here for example:

This article is written in 2012.

In this article, php 5.3 takes 85sec, Python 2.7 takes 53sec and CRuby 1.8 takes 213sec. (!!)

For now:

$ python2 -V

Python 2.7.11

$ time python2 -S fib.py

39088169

real 0m17.133s

user 0m16.970s

sys 0m0.055s

$ python3 -V

Python 3.5.1

$ time python3 -S fib.py

39088169

real 0m21.380s

user 0m21.337s

sys 0m0.028s

$ php -v

PHP 7.0.2 (cli) (built: Jan 7 2016 10:40:21) ( NTS )

$ time php fib.php

39088169

real 0m7.706s

user 0m7.654s

sys 0m0.027s

$ ruby -v

ruby 2.3.0p0 (2015-12-25 revision 53290) \[x86\_64-darwin14\]

$ time ruby fib.rb

39088169

real 0m6.195s

user 0m6.124s

sys 0m0.032s

Fibonacci microbench measures performance of function call.

When I said "Base language performance", I meant performance of

function call, attribute lookup, GC, etc...

PHP and Ruby made grate effort to improve base language performance.

While I'm fan of Python, I respect people made PHP and Ruby faster.

Of course, I respect people making Python faster too.

But I wonder if CPython is more faster, especially about global lookup and function call.