Francesco Guerrieri wrote:
> On 6/14/07, Peter Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Gabriel Genellina wrote:
>> > ...
>> > py> print timeit.Timer("f2()", "from __main__ import
>> f2").repeat(number=1)
>> > [0.42673663831576358, 0.42807591467630662, 0.44401481193838876]
>> > py> print timeit.Timer("f1()", "from __main__ import
>> f1").repeat(number=1)
>> >
>> > ...after a few minutes I aborted the process...
>>
>> I can't confirm this.
>
> [...]
>
>> $ python2.5 -m timeit -s 'from join import f1' 'f1()'
>> 10 loops, best of 3: 212 msec per loop
>> $ python2.5 -m timeit -s 'from join import f2' 'f2()'
>> 10 loops, best of 3: 259 msec per loop
>> $ python2.5 -m timeit -s 'from join import f3' 'f3()'
>> 10 loops, best of 3: 236 msec per loop
>
> On my machine (using python 2.5 under win xp) the results are:
>>>> print timeit.Timer("f2()", "from __main__ import f2").repeat(number
>>>> = 1)
> [0.19726834822823575, 0.19324697456408974, 0.19474492594212861]
>>>> print timeit.Timer("f1()", "from __main__ import f1").repeat(number
>>>> = 1)
> [21.982707133304167, 21.905312587963252, 22.843430035622767]
>
> so it seems that there is a rather sensible difference.
> what's the reason of the apparent inconsistency with Peter's test?
It sounds like a platform memory resize difference.
- Josiah
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
