Tim Holy <tim.h...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> And I hope that Tim Holy is interested too :-) Sure, I'll bite :-). On the topic of which statistic to show, I am a real fan of the histogram. As has been pointed out, timing in the real world can be pretty complicated, and I don't think it does anyone good to hide that complexity. Even in cases where machines aren't busy doing other things, you can get weird multimodal distributions. A great example (maybe not relevant to a lot of Python benchmarks...) is in multithreaded algorithms where the main thread is both responsible for scheduling other threads and for a portion of the work. Even in an almost-idle machine, you can get little race conditions where the main thread decides to pick up some work instants before another thread starts looking for more work. That can generate peaks in the histogram that are separated by the time for one "unit" of work. But if you have to quote one and only one number, I'm a fan of the minimum (as long as you can trust it---which relies on assuming that you've accurately calibrated away all the overhead of your timing apparatus, and not any more). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue45261> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
