[issue24375] Performance regression relative to 2.7

Yury Selivanov added the comment: Alright. I'm closing it, as it seems it's not obvious what's really going on here. I'll try to profile it on my own later. > (also, computing the Mandelbrot set using the CPython interpreter isn't a > very good use case) Antoine, well, regardless of the act

[issue24375] Performance regression relative to 2.7

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: > This is strange. On one of my gentoo boxes I'm having about the same > performance of 2.7.9 and 3.4.3. As I said: the computed gotos patch improved performance between 2.7.9 and 2.7.10. In any case, if there's no obvious course of action you can suggest, I

[issue24375] Performance regression relative to 2.7

Yury Selivanov added the comment: This is strange. On one of my gentoo boxes I'm having about the same performance of 2.7.9 and 3.4.3. On macos x, 2.7.10 is faster than 3.5.x (make distclean & ./configure & make). I don't know if I should close this issue. --

[issue24375] Performance regression relative to 2.7

Stefan Krah added the comment: This is my experience, too: Floating-point calculations are often 20-30% faster on 2.7. -- nosy: +skrah ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue24375] Performance regression relative to 2.7

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: FTR, Python 2.7 was slower until the computed gotos patch was backported. -- ___ Python tracker ___

[issue24375] Performance regression relative to 2.7

New submission from Yury Selivanov: Attached (t.py) is a random script that I stumbled upon pretty randomly on the internet -- someone used it to test different languages VMs performance. The interesting thing is that 2.7 runs it 20-30% faster than 3.4 & 3.5 consistently. The script does not