3 ms·
That is already explained by the author [1]: > The resulting interpreter is about 9% faster than the no-GIL proof-of-concept (or ~19% faster than CPython 3.9.0
by selcuka 5y ago
That is already explained by the author [1]:
> The resulting interpreter is about 9% faster than the no-GIL proof-of-concept (or ~19% faster than CPython 3.9.0a3). That 9% difference between the “nogil” interpreter and the stripped-down “nogil” interpreter can be thought of as the “cost” of the major GIL-removal changes.
[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/18CXhDb1ygxg-YXNBJNzfzZsDFosB5e6BfnXLlejd9l0/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/18CXhDb1ygxg-YXNBJNzfzZsD...
- qeternity 5y agoThanks for this. It’s interesting because I think many people (myself included) would be far more interested in the perf patches than the GILectomy.