Peter Hansen wrote:
> Riko, any chance you could post the final code and a bit more detail on
> exactly how much Psyco contributed to the speedup? The former would be
> educational for all of us, while I'm personally very curious about the
> latter because my limited attempts to use Psyco in th
Bengt Richter wrote:
...
>
> This could be achieved by a custom import function that would capture the AST
> and e.g. recognize a declaration like __inline__ = foo, bar followed by defs
> of foo and bar, and extracting that from the AST and modifying the rest of the
> AST wherever foo and bar call
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 08:47:37 +1100, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 13:18:32 +0100, Riko Wichmann wrote:
>
>> hi everyone,
>>
>> I'm googeling since some time, but can't find an answer - maybe because
>> the answer is 'No!'.
>>
>> Can I call a function in python
Diez B. Roggisch wrote:
> No. That is simply impossible in python as well as in java where functions
> are always virtual, meaning they are looked up at runtime. Because you'd
> never know _which_ code to insert of all the different foo()-methods that
> might be around there.
Not quite "simply imp
Peter Hansen wrote:
>
> Seeing what others have achieved is always educational to the ignorant,
> so I learned something. ;-)
Would have been even more educating, if I had my original code still at
hand for comparison, which unfortunately I didn't. But all the
improvements come from following
I haven't examined the code very well, but generally I don't suggest to
use exceptions inside tight loops that that have to go fast.
Bye,
bearophile
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Riko Wichmann wrote:
> the difference between running with and without psyco is about a factor
> 3 for my MC simulation.
> A factor 3 I consider worthwhile, especially since it doesn't really
> cost you much.
Definitely. "import psyco; psyco.full()" is pretty hard to argue
against. :-)
> Th
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 13:18:32 +0100, Riko Wichmann wrote:
> hi everyone,
>
> I'm googeling since some time, but can't find an answer - maybe because
> the answer is 'No!'.
>
> Can I call a function in python inline, so that the python byte compiler
> does actually call the function, but sort of
Hi Peter,
> Riko, any chance you could post the final code and a bit more detail on
> exactly how much Psyco contributed to the speedup? The former would be
> educational for all of us, while I'm personally very curious about the
> latter because my limited attempts to use Psyco in the past ha
Peter Hansen>but I'd be happy to see a real-world case where Psyco gave
a much bigger boost.)<
Psyco can be very fast, but:
- the program has to be the right one;
- you have to use "low level" programming, programming more like in C,
avoiding most of the nice things Python has, like list generator
Riko Wichmann wrote:
> That greatly improved performance from about 3 minutes initially (inner
> loop about 2000, outer loop about 1 runs - I think) down to a few
> seconds. My question on the inline function call was triggered by the 3
> minute run on a pretty small statistic (
, outer loop about 1 runs - I think) down to a few
seconds. My question on the inline function call was triggered by the 3
minute run on a pretty small statistic (1 events) Monte Carlo
sample. Now, I'm much more relaxed! :)
One of the biggest improvements in addition to using psyc
On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 13:18:32 +0100, Riko Wichmann wrote:
> I'm googeling since some time, but can't find an answer - maybe because
> the answer is 'No!'.
>
> Can I call a function in python inline, so that the python byte compiler
> does actually call the function, but sort of inserts it where
Riko Wichmann wrote:
> def riskfunc(med, low, high):
> if med != 0.0:
> u = random()
> try:
> if u <= (med-low)/(high-low):
> r = low+sqrt(u*(high-low)*(med-low))
> else:
> r = high - sqrt((1.0-u)*(high-low)*(high-me
Riko Wichmann wrote:
> hi everyone,
>
> I'm googeling since some time, but can't find an answer - maybe because
> the answer is 'No!'.
>
> Can I call a function in python inline, so that the python byte compiler
> does actually call the function, but sort of inserts it where the inline
> call
Riko Wichmann wrote:
> Can I call a function in python inline, so that the python byte compiler
> does actually call the function, but sort of inserts it where the inline
> call is made? Therefore avoiding the function all overhead.
I know a simple technique that could should basically avoid the
> Do you have an actual use-case for that? I mean, do you have code that runs
> slow, but with inlined code embarrassingly faster?
Well, I guess it would not actually be embarrassingly faster. From
trying various things and actually copying the function code into the
DoMC routine, I estimate to
Riko Wichmann wrote:
> Can I call a function in python inline, so that the python byte compiler
> does actually call the function, but sort of inserts it where the inline
> call is made? Therefore avoiding the function all overhead.
No. That is simply impossible in python as well as in java where
I think it does'n exists.
But should be.
You can also roll up your own using some templating library..
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
hi everyone,
I'm googeling since some time, but can't find an answer - maybe because
the answer is 'No!'.
Can I call a function in python inline, so that the python byte compiler
does actually call the function, but sort of inserts it where the inline
call is made? Therefore avoiding the funct
20 matches
Mail list logo
