Pyhon 2.x or 3.x, which is faster?

[Mark Lawrence]

On 08/03/2016 01:47, BartC wrote:
> On 08/03/2016 01:12, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>> On 08/03/2016 01:00, BartC wrote:
>>>
>>> If your efforts manage to double the speed of reading file A, then
>>> probably the reading file B is also going to be improved! In practice
>>> you use a variety of files, but one at a time will do.
>>>
>>
>> What is the difference in your timing when you first read the file, and
>> then read it a second time when it's been cached by the OS?  In other
>> words, you are probably measuring more of the response time of the disk
>> than the code that does the reading, hence making your figures useless.
>>
>
> It's not going to be significant. My hard drive is going to read at,
> what, 100MB per second? Probably more.
>
> One test file is 0.2MB. Load time is going to be negligible whether
> cached or not.
>
> The Python timing for that file is around 20 seconds, time enough to
> read 10000 copies from the disk.
>
> And a C program reads /and decodes/ the same file from the same disk in
> between 0.1 and 0.2 seconds.
>

So how much of that time is Python startup time, compared to C which is 
effectively zero?  Or are you suggesting that C code is always 100 times 
faster than Python?  Of course I'd like to see you write C code 100 
times faster than Python, but of course that's where Python shines, 
which is why it is so popular.

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence