Re: cpython: Issue #14428: Use the new time.perf_counter() and time.process_time() functions

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cpython: Issue #14428: Use the new time.perf_counter() and time.process_time() functions

Georg Brandl-2
On 29.04.2012 03:04, victor.stinner wrote:
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/bd195749c0a2
> changeset:   76599:bd195749c0a2
> user:        Victor Stinner <[hidden email]>
> date:        Sun Apr 29 03:01:20 2012 +0200
> summary:
>   Issue #14428: Use the new time.perf_counter() and time.process_time() functions

[...]

> diff --git a/Lib/timeit.py b/Lib/timeit.py
> --- a/Lib/timeit.py
> +++ b/Lib/timeit.py
> @@ -15,8 +15,8 @@
>    -n/--number N: how many times to execute 'statement' (default: see below)
>    -r/--repeat N: how many times to repeat the timer (default 3)
>    -s/--setup S: statement to be executed once initially (default 'pass')
> -  -t/--time: use time.time() (default on Unix)
> -  -c/--clock: use time.clock() (default on Windows)
> +  -t/--time: use time.time()
> +  -c/--clock: use time.clock()

Does it make sense to keep the options this way?  IMO the distinction should be
to use either perf_counter() or process_time(), and the options could implement
this (-t -> perf_counter, -c -> process_time).

Georg


_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%2B1324100855712-1801473%40n6.nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cpython: Issue #14428: Use the new time.perf_counter() and time.process_time() functions

Victor Stinner-3
>> diff --git a/Lib/timeit.py b/Lib/timeit.py
>> --- a/Lib/timeit.py
>> +++ b/Lib/timeit.py
>> @@ -15,8 +15,8 @@
>>    -n/--number N: how many times to execute 'statement' (default: see below)
>>    -r/--repeat N: how many times to repeat the timer (default 3)
>>    -s/--setup S: statement to be executed once initially (default 'pass')
>> -  -t/--time: use time.time() (default on Unix)
>> -  -c/--clock: use time.clock() (default on Windows)
>> +  -t/--time: use time.time()
>> +  -c/--clock: use time.clock()
>
> Does it make sense to keep the options this way?  IMO the distinction should be
> to use either perf_counter() or process_time(), and the options could implement
> this (-t -> perf_counter, -c -> process_time).

You might need to use exactly the same clock to compare performance of
Python 3.2 and 3.3.

Adding an option to use time.process_time() is a good idea. Is anyone
interested to implement it?

Victor
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%2B1324100855712-1801473%40n6.nabble.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: cpython: Issue #14428: Use the new time.perf_counter() and time.process_time() functions

Georg Brandl-2
On 01.05.2012 10:35, Victor Stinner wrote:

>>> diff --git a/Lib/timeit.py b/Lib/timeit.py
>>> --- a/Lib/timeit.py
>>> +++ b/Lib/timeit.py
>>> @@ -15,8 +15,8 @@
>>>    -n/--number N: how many times to execute 'statement' (default: see below)
>>>    -r/--repeat N: how many times to repeat the timer (default 3)
>>>    -s/--setup S: statement to be executed once initially (default 'pass')
>>> -  -t/--time: use time.time() (default on Unix)
>>> -  -c/--clock: use time.clock() (default on Windows)
>>> +  -t/--time: use time.time()
>>> +  -c/--clock: use time.clock()
>>
>> Does it make sense to keep the options this way?  IMO the distinction should be
>> to use either perf_counter() or process_time(), and the options could implement
>> this (-t -> perf_counter, -c -> process_time).
>
> You might need to use exactly the same clock to compare performance of
> Python 3.2 and 3.3.
>
> Adding an option to use time.process_time() is a good idea. Is anyone
> interested to implement it?

I implemented it in d43a8aa9dbef.  I also updated the docs in 552c207f65e4.

Georg

_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/lists%2B1324100855712-1801473%40n6.nabble.com