On 27-07-2009, Bearophile wrote: > William Dode': >> I updated the script (python, c and java) with your unrolled version >> + somes litle thinks. > [...] >> c 1.85s >> gcj 2.15s >> java 2.8s >> python2.5 + psyco 3.1s >> unladen-2009Q2 145s (2m45) >> python2.5 254s (4m14s) >> python3.1 300s (5m) >> ironpython1.1.1 680s (11m20) > > Sorry for being late, I was away. > > In your last C version this code is useless because the C compiler is > able to perform such simple optimization by itself (but probably > Python isn't able, so if you want the code to be the similar in all > versions it may be better to keep it):
I wanted so, specialy if it doesn't change a lot of the result (the difference is so small that i cannot see it)... ... > I have tried your latest C version using your compiler options, my > MinGW based on GCC 4.3.2 produces a crash at runtime. Maybe because of -msse2 ? > Using LLVM-GCC > it runs in 1.31 seconds. The D version is a bit less optimized than > your last C versions, yet using DMD it runs in 1.08-1.10 seconds. > Let's see if someone is able to write a C version faster than that D > code :-) > > Have you have compiled/read my D version? In the D version you may > have missed that I did use an extra trick: unsigned integers, so it > needs just two tests to see if a number is in the 0-5, 0-5 square :-) I didn't see, fine ! But the difference is also too small to see... > Note that Pyd, the Python-D bridge, may work with the latest DMD > version still (and it works if you use a bit older DMD compiler): > http://pyd.dsource.org/ I completly don't know anything about D... When i see the result of psyco or shedskin, i'm affraid i'll not look somewhere else soon ! However, i'd like to see a lisp implementation of this... bye -- William Dodé - http://flibuste.net Informaticien Indépendant -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
