Author catalin.manciu
Recipients catalin.manciu, florin.papa, vstinner
Date 2016-02-19.11:06:30
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1455879991.19.0.181057753079.issue26382@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Theoretically, an object type that consistently allocates more than the small object threshold would perform a bit slower because
it would first jump to the small object allocator, do the size comparison and then jump to malloc. There would be a small overhead 
if PyMem_* would be redirected to PyObject_* in this (hypothetical) case and the initial choice of PyMem_* over PyObject_* might have 
been determined by knowing about that overhead. This is because many think of PyMem_* as the lower-level allocator, PyObject_* as a
higher-level one. Of course, PyMem_Raw* should be used in such cases, but it's not as widely adopted as the other two.

I will post some benchmark results on your issue page as soon as I get them.
History
Date User Action Args
2016-02-19 11:06:31catalin.manciusetrecipients: + catalin.manciu, vstinner, florin.papa
2016-02-19 11:06:31catalin.manciusetmessageid: <1455879991.19.0.181057753079.issue26382@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2016-02-19 11:06:31catalin.manciulinkissue26382 messages
2016-02-19 11:06:30catalin.manciucreate