Author p-ganssle
Recipients belopolsky, berker.peksag, bmispelon, corona10, p-ganssle, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, taleinat, tim.peters, vstinner
Date 2019-09-08.18:16:47
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1567966607.65.0.736480634271.issue24416@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content
I have compiled both versions with optimizations on, looks like the gap gets a bit smaller (percentage-wise) after that:

       benchmark                    |  master (ns)  |  PR 15633 (ns)  |  Δ (%)
------------------------------------+---------------+-----------------+----------
call only (datetime)                |     73 (±3)   |     92.3 (±7)   |   26
constructor + call (datetime)       |    228 (±9)   |     260 (±16)   |   14
timedelta + call (datetime)         |    108 (±5)   |     128 (±9)    |   18

If this were something fundamental like a performance regression in building a tuple or constructing a dictionary or something I'd be concerned, but this just reinforces my feeling that, on balance, this is worth it, and that we are probably not going to need a "fast path" version of this.
History
Date User Action Args
2019-09-08 18:16:47p-gansslesetrecipients: + p-ganssle, tim.peters, rhettinger, belopolsky, vstinner, taleinat, berker.peksag, serhiy.storchaka, bmispelon, corona10
2019-09-08 18:16:47p-gansslesetmessageid: <1567966607.65.0.736480634271.issue24416@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2019-09-08 18:16:47p-gansslelinkissue24416 messages
2019-09-08 18:16:47p-gansslecreate