STINNER Victor <vstin...@redhat.com> added the comment: > Wait, I didn't notice the change to the format of raw timings. It looks as a > regression to me.
Do you mean that some applications may run timeit as a CLI and parse stdout to get raw values? Why doing so? timeit is a Python module, it's trivial to use its API to avoid using the CLI, no? I don't think that the CLI output must not change. master branch: vstinner@apu$ ./python -m timeit -v '[1,2]*1000' 1 loop -> 1.73e-05 secs 2 loops -> 6.49e-05 secs 5 loops -> 0.000107 secs 10 loops -> 0.000173 secs 20 loops -> 0.000331 secs 50 loops -> 0.000798 secs 100 loops -> 0.00159 secs 200 loops -> 0.00304 secs 500 loops -> 0.00777 secs 1000 loops -> 0.0163 secs 2000 loops -> 0.0315 secs 5000 loops -> 0.0775 secs 10000 loops -> 0.154 secs 20000 loops -> 0.311 secs raw times: 310 msec, 313 msec, 308 msec, 303 msec, 304 msec 20000 loops, best of 5: 15.2 usec per loop Python 3.6: vstinner@apu$ python3 -m timeit -v '[1,2]*1000' 10 loops -> 3.41e-05 secs 100 loops -> 0.000345 secs 1000 loops -> 0.00327 secs 10000 loops -> 0.0332 secs 100000 loops -> 0.325 secs raw times: 0.319 0.316 0.319 100000 loops, best of 3: 3.16 usec per loop Hum, the timings of the calibration (xx loops -> ...) should use the same function to format time to use ns, ms, etc. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue28240> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
