On 05/19/2010 03:46 AM, forum@x9c.fr wrote:
> Jon Harrop <jonathandeanharrop@googlemail.com> a écrit :
> 
> (...)
> 
>> I don't think this is heated at all. We were talking about "high 
>> performance" languages and you cited a bunch of languages that get 
>> whipped by Python on this benchmark:
>>  
>> http://flyingfrogblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/f-vs-ocaml-vs-haskell-hash-table.html
>>
> 
> Acknowledged. "Whipped" is here 2 times slower on that particular
> benchmark, while Python is rarely within an order of magnitude of
> OCaml code (cf. the language shootout). Moreover, hashtables are
> ubiquitous in Python (and hence probably particularly optimized),
> while they are not so common in Haskell or Caml.

Yes, Python's hash tables are particularly optimized due to their wide
pervasive usage.  When you're testing Python hash tables, you're really
testing a carefully-written, thoroughly-tuned C implementation of hash
tables.

- Michael