Xinhang Xu <xuxinhang4...@126.com> added the comment:
I post a comment to the PR showing its performance improvement. I paste it below. I think the result not bad. ------------- I use timeit to measure time costs and any other operators or calls are excluded. For each testcase, the former is dcd2796 and the latter is this PR's base 036bbb1. 64-bit Release building. Run in Windows 10 1709 (64-bit) python -m timeit " i = 1; i <<= 3; i >>= 3" # small value (cost down by 36%) 5000000 loops, best of 5: 92.7 nsec per loop 2000000 loops, best of 5: 145 nsec per loop python -m timeit " i = 1; i <<= 10; i >>= 10" # medium value (-25%) 2000000 loops, best of 5: 114 nsec per loop 2000000 loops, best of 5: 151 nsec per loop python -m timeit " i = 1; i <<= 100; i >>= 100" # big value (-12%) 1000000 loops, best of 5: 209 nsec per loop 1000000 loops, best of 5: 238 nsec per loop ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue46055> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
