Hacker News Reader

Comment by boerseth | Hacker News Reader

That's a long list of numbers that seem oddly specific. Apart from learning that f-strings are way faster than the alternatives, and certain other comparisons, I'm not sure what I would use this for day-to-day.

After skimming over all of them, it seems like most "simple" operations take on the order of 20ns. I will leave with that rule of thumb in mind.

View on HN

If you're interested, fstrings are faster because they directly become bytecode at compile time rather than being a function call at runtime

Thanks for the that bit of info! I was surprised by the speed difference. I have always assumed that most variations of basic string formatting would compile to the same bytecode.

I usually prefer classic %-formatting for readability when the arguments are longer and f-strings when the arguments are shorter. Knowing there is a material performance difference at scale, might shift the balance in favour of f-strings for some situations.

That number isn't very useful either, it really depends on the hardware. Most virtualized server CPUs where e.g. Django will run on in the end are nowhere near the author's M4 Pro.

Last time I benchmarked a VPS it was about the performance of an Ivy Bridge generation laptop.

> Last time I benchmarked a VPS it was about the performance of an Ivy Bridge generation laptop.

I have a number of Intel N95 systems around the house for various things. I've found them to be a pretty accurate analog for small instances VPSes. The N95 are Intel E-cores which are effectively Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge cores.

Stuff can fly on my MacBook but than drag on a small VPS instance but validating against an N95 (I already have) is helpful. YMMV.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com