E
EP
On questions of the suitability of Python for CGI, embedded apps, etc.,
execution speed comes to mind. I previously read some comparisons which
did not show Python in a good light in this regard: i.e. Python is slow
compared to Perl, C++, Java.
http://www.flat222.org/mac/bench/
Is there more authoritative and current information IRT speed comparisons?
Is newer Python any faster?
Also, if Python is a bit slower in execution than some alternative
languages, what do others do in practice to speed it up, and how much of
that optimization do they do? Or is a slower speed to be accepted like one
learns to accept that their lovely bride takes a long time getting ready to
go out ?
TIA,
Eric
P.S. I tried to replicate the simple "console test" with Python 2.3 on my
PC. Using the Windows command prompt, on a reasonably modern PC (128MB
RAM, 1.3 AMD chip), I clocked 72.45 seconds to print the numbers up to
999,999, which is more than 3x as long as the results reported in the link
given.
Then running the same program out of IDLE I clocked 627.48 seconds printing
the numbers only up to 99,999. Perhaps that's a caution about launching
any large processes out of IDLE? Here's the test script:
import time
def loop_time():
start=time.time()
for x in xrange(1000000):
print x
end=time.time()
exectime=end-start
return exectime
nada=raw_input('Press return when ready')
run=loop_time()
print 'Timed loop ran for: '+str(run)+' seconds'
execution speed comes to mind. I previously read some comparisons which
did not show Python in a good light in this regard: i.e. Python is slow
compared to Perl, C++, Java.
http://www.flat222.org/mac/bench/
Is there more authoritative and current information IRT speed comparisons?
Is newer Python any faster?
Also, if Python is a bit slower in execution than some alternative
languages, what do others do in practice to speed it up, and how much of
that optimization do they do? Or is a slower speed to be accepted like one
learns to accept that their lovely bride takes a long time getting ready to
go out ?
TIA,
Eric
P.S. I tried to replicate the simple "console test" with Python 2.3 on my
PC. Using the Windows command prompt, on a reasonably modern PC (128MB
RAM, 1.3 AMD chip), I clocked 72.45 seconds to print the numbers up to
999,999, which is more than 3x as long as the results reported in the link
given.
Then running the same program out of IDLE I clocked 627.48 seconds printing
the numbers only up to 99,999. Perhaps that's a caution about launching
any large processes out of IDLE? Here's the test script:
import time
def loop_time():
start=time.time()
for x in xrange(1000000):
print x
end=time.time()
exectime=end-start
return exectime
nada=raw_input('Press return when ready')
run=loop_time()
print 'Timed loop ran for: '+str(run)+' seconds'