[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

STINNER Victor added the comment: The performance project is now hosted on GitHub. I created a pull request from Serhiy's patch: https://github.com/python/performance/pull/17 So I now close this issue. Let's continue the discussion there. -- resolution: -> third party status: open ->

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

STINNER Victor added the comment: I created https://github.com/python/performance/issues/15 -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

Changes by Serhiy Storchaka : -- components: +Regular Expressions nosy: +ezio.melotti, mrabarnett ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bu

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

STINNER Victor added the comment: Serhiy: Can you please open a pull request on the new performance module? https://github.com/python/performance -- nosy: +haypo ___ Python tracker

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: I used the code from fasta and regex-dna tests almost without changes. I.e. one part create the data in standard FASTA format (with 60-character lines and headers), and other part parses this format. The code can be simple if generate and consume raw data.

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

Terry J. Reedy added the comment: DNA matching can be done with difflib. Serious high-volume work should use compiled specialized matchers and aligners. This particular benchmark, explained a bit at https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/regexdna-description.html#regexdna, manipulates

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I would add another kind of question: is it stressing something useful that isn't already stressed by the two other regex benchmarks we already have? Given that it seems built around a highly-specialized use case (DNA matching?) and we don't even know if regul

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

Brett Cannon added the comment: Terry's right about what I meant; is the code of such quality that you would let it into the stdlib? As for execution time, I would vote for increasing the input size to take 1 second as it's just going to get faster and faster just from CPU improvements alone

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

Terry J. Reedy added the comment: I believe Brett is asking whether the code looks like the sort of Python code that one of us might write, as opposed to 'language X in Python'. In my quick perusal, As far as I looked, I would say yes, except for using floats and while instead of int and for

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: > I assume the code looks idiomatic to you? Sorry, I have not understood your question. Could you please reformulate? The performance of all Python versions is rough the same. 2.7 is about 8% slower than 3.2 and 3.3, 3.4-default are about 3-4% slower than 3.

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

Brett Cannon added the comment: Oh, and how long does an execution take? -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list U

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

Brett Cannon added the comment: I assume the code looks idiomatic to you? And out of curiosity, what does the performance look like between something 3.5 and default? -- ___ Python tracker ___

[issue26436] Add the regex-dna benchmark

New submission from Serhiy Storchaka: Proposed patch adds the regex-dna benchmark from The Computer Language Benchmarks Game (http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/). This is artificial but well known benchmark. The patch is based on regex-dna Python 3 #5 program and fasta Python 3 #3 progr