[Python-Dev] FAT Python (lack of) performance (original) (raw)

INADA Naoki songofacandy at gmail.com
Tue Jan 26 00:02:31 EST 2016

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: http://d.hatena.ne.jp/satosystems/20121228/1356655565

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 ) Copyright (c) 1997-2015 The PHP Group Zend Engine v3.0.0, Copyright (c) 1998-2015 Zend Technologies $ 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.

-- INADA Naoki <songofacandy at gmail.com> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20160126/30442262/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list