Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

blog.miguelgrinberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 579 posts

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#161

Post by OskarS »

lucb1e wrote: post #151
librasteve wrote: post #146

Very nice post - it's good to see benchmarks done for humans. For fun, I tried this in Raku: (0, 1, *+* ... *)[40] #0.10s user 0.03s system 63% cpu 0.214 total lol Seriously, Python is doing great stuff to squeeze out performance from a scripting language. Realistically, Raku has fewer native libraries (although there is Inline::Python) and the compiler still has a lot of work to get the same degree of optimisation (…

I take it this is supposed to be the equivalent of fib(40), which ran on the author's system in Pyπ in 6.59 seconds and apparently on yours, with Raku, in 0.21? Do you have the same hardware as the author or should one of you run the other's variant to make this directly comparable?

No, this is very much not the same. The Raku version is like writing this in Python:

    def fibonacci():
        a, b = 0, 1

        while True:
            yield a
            a, b = b, a+b
And taking the 40th element. It's not comparable at all to the benchmark, that's deliberately an extremely slow method of calculating fibonacci numbers for the purpose of the benchmark. For this version, it's so fast that the time is dominated by the time needed to start up and tear down the interpreter.

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#162

Post by lucb1e »

semiinfinitely wrote: post #88
modeless wrote: post #38

What are the reasons why nobody uses pypy?

because it turns out that optimizing performance of a programming language designed for use-cases where runtime performance doesn't matter ... doesn't matter

Might as well take the work that's already done though? I can't think of a logical reason why you'd want to run it at potentially half the speed (depending on the hot code specifics how much, if any, speedup you get of course)

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#163

Post by zahlman »

librasteve wrote: post #146

Very nice post - it's good to see benchmarks done for humans. For fun, I tried this in Raku: (0, 1, *+* ... *)[40] #0.10s user 0.03s system 63% cpu 0.214 total lol Seriously, Python is doing great stuff to squeeze out performance from a scripting language. Realistically, Raku has fewer native libraries (although there is Inline::Python) and the compiler still has a lot of work to get the same degree of optimisation (…

Well, sure; you're using dynamic programming, while the stress test Python Fibonacci code is deliberately using recursion without memoization — it makes function calls proportionate to the number computed. Most of the time you're seeing in the Raku code is the interpreter startup. Python doesn't have syntax strongly oriented towards that sort of trick (it's not as strong of a second-best APL as it is a second-best Lisp or Haskell), but:

  $ python -m timeit "x = (1, 0); [x[0] for _ in range(40) if (x := (x[0] + x[1], x[0]))][-1]"
  50000 loops, best of 5: 4 usec per loop
(Or a "lazy iterator" approach:)

  $ python -m timeit --setup 'from itertools import islice, count' 'x = (1, 0); next(islice((x[0] for _ in count() if (x := (x[0] + x[1], x[0]))), 40, None))'
  50000 loops, best of 5: 5.26 usec per loop

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#165

Post by feoren »

dieggsy wrote: post #141
feoren wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You hope it doesn't ? > [Donald Knuth] firmly believes that having an unchanged system that will produce the same output now and in the future is more important than introducing new features This is such a breath of fresh air in a world where everything is considered obsolete after like 3 years. Our industry has a disease, an insatiable hunger for newness over completeness or correctness . There's no reason we can't…

Are you by chance a Common Lisp developer? If not, you may like it (well, judging only by your praise of stability). Completely sidestepping any debate about the language design, ease of use, quality of the standard library, size of community, etc... one of its strengths these days is that standard code basically remains functional "indefinitely", since the standard is effectively frozen. Of course, this requires imp…

I respect and understand the appeal of LISP. It is a great example of code not having to change all the time. I personally haven't had a compelling reason to use it (post college), but I'm glad I learned it and I wouldn't be averse to taking a job that required it.

While writing "timeless" code is certainly an ideal of mine, it also competes with the ideals of writing useful code that does useful things for my employer or the goals of my hobby project, and I'm not sure "getting actual useful things done" is necessarily LISP's strong suit, although I'm sure I'm ruffling feathers by saying so. I like more modern programming languages for other reasons, but their propensity to make backward-incompatible changes is definitely a point of frustration for me. Languages improving in backward-compatible ways is generally a good thing; your code can still be relatively "timeless" in such an environment. Some languages walk this line better than others.

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#167

Post by feoren »

psychoslave wrote: post #149
feoren wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the real ones use Typst now Are you intentionally leaning into the exact caricature I'm referring to? " Real programmers only use Typstly, because it's the newest !". The website title for Typst when I Googled it literally says "The new foundation for documents". Its entire appeal is that it's new? Thank you for giving me such a perfect example of the symptom I'm talking about. > TeX and family are stagnant, diffic…

>My point is not that math never changes -- it should, and does. However, math does not simply rot over time, like code seems to (or at least we simply assume it does). Math does not age out. Just in the same sense that CS does not age out. Most concepts stick, but I'm pretty sure you didn't go through Στοιχεία (The Elements) in its original version. I'm also pretty confident that most people out there that use many…

> I'm pretty sure you didn't go through Στοιχεία (The Elements) in its original version

This is like saying "you haven't read the source code of the first version of Linux". The only reason to do that would be for historical interest. There is still something timeless about it, and I absolutely did learn Euclid's postulates which he laid down in those books, all 5 of which are still foundational to most geometry calculations in the world today, and 4 of which are foundational to even non-Euclidean geometry. The Elements is a perfect example of math that has remained relevant and useful for thousands of years.

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#168

Post by Stratoscope »

wiseowise wrote: post #134
nadermx wrote: post #10

Tangential, but I practically owe my life to this guy. He wrote the flask mega tutorial in what I followed religiously to launch my first website. Then right before launch, in the most critical part of my entire application; piping a fragged file in flask. He answered my stackoverflow question, I put his fix live, and the site went viral. Here's the link for posterity's sake https://stackoverflow.com/a/34391304/41802…

> flask Off-topic, but I absolutely loathe new Flask logo. Old one[0] has this vintage, crafty feel. And the new one[1] looks like it was made by a starving high schooler experimenting with WordArt. [0] - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3c/Flask_lo... [1] - https://flask.palletsprojects.com/en/stable/_images/flask-na...

I hope they go Full Cracker Barrel on this:

1. Original logo has country charm and soul.

2. Replaced with a modern soulless logo.

3. Customer outrage!

4. Company (or open source project) comes to its senses and returns to old logo.

https://media.nbcboston.com/2025/08/cracker-barrel-split.jpg

(n.b. The Cracker Barrel Rebellion is sometimes associated with MAGA. I am very far from that, but I have to respect when people of any political stripe get something right.)

Re: Python 3.14 is here. How fast is it?

#170

Post by makestuff »

the__alchemist wrote: post #23
kstrauser wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been writing Python professionally for a couple of decades, and there've only been 2-3 times where its performance actually mattered. When writing a Flask API, the timing usually looks like: process the request for .1ms, make a DB call for 300ms, generate a response for .1ms. Or writing some data science stuff, it might be like: load data from disk or network for 6 seconds, run Numpy on it for 3 hours, write it…

That's because you're doing web stuff. (I/O limited). So much of our computing experience has been degraded due to this mindset applied more broadly. Despite a steady improvement in hardware, my computing experiences have been stagnating and degraded in terms of latency, responsiveness etc. I'm not going to even go into the comp chem simulations I've been running, or that about 1/3 the stuff I do is embedded. I do st…

As a java backend dev mainly working on web services, I wanted to like python, but I have found it really hard to work on a large python project because the auto complete just does not work as well as something like java.

Maybe it is just due to not being as familiar with how to properly setup a python project, but every time I have had to do something in a django or fast api project it is a mess of missing types.

How do you handle that with modern python? Or is it just a limitation of the language itself?

Post reply on HN