Chao wrote: > While trying this another question comes up, > psyco seems to be able to optimize built-in functions & user's code, if > I call a function from an external library, it seems doesn't help. > A simple thing is I placed a = numpy.sin(a) in the loop rather than a = > a+1, in this case, > psyco doesn't have any improvement(or very little). if I put a = > math.sin(a) which is from an built-in function, it can achieve a > improvement around 3~4. Could the reason be that numpy.sin is > actually calling a C library ?
The reason for the difference is that psyco recognizes math.sin() and replaces it with equivalent machine code to call the standard C library function sin(). It does not recognize numpy.sin(), and it is implemented in C, not Python, so it does not do optimization. > Actually Python does show comparable/better performance than other > scripting languages. but I'm just surprised that matlab does a great > job compared to python/perl, since matlab is also a interpreted > language, I'm expecting it has silimar performance with python. Matlab uses a JIT compiler along the lines of psyco for simple operations like the one you are doing. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
