-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31.8k
gh-130167: Improve speed of inspect.formatannotation
by replacing re
#130242
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
inspect.formatannotation
by replacing re
inspect.formatannotation
by replacing re
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Library/2025-02-18-05-04-13.gh-issue-130167.aOgAz_.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Hugo van Kemenade <1324225+hugovk@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm less sure this is worth it, the replacement isn't clearly better maintenence-wise.
What do the benchmarks look like if you extract repl
to a module-level _formatannotation_repl
and use .sub()
on a pre-compiled pattern?
A
sorry, I forgot how python was compiled then :( but I'm pretty sure I compiled it with gcc last time so I reran the test with the following config args Old version (re.sub): 0.982520s
New version (.replace()): 0.701049s
Difference: 1.40x # sometimes it's 1.35x and if we rewrite old version of benchmark as you suggested: _pattern = re.compile(r"[\w\.]+")
def _repl(match):
text = match.group()
return text.removeprefix("typing.")
def old_format_annotation(annotation):
if getattr(annotation, "__module__", None) == "typing":
return re.sub(_pattern, _repl, repr(annotation))
return repr(annotation) we will get a bigger difference: Old version (re.sub): 1.027774s
New version (.replace()): 0.698902s
Difference: 1.47x # the result can drop to 1.40 P.S.: another reason i like the PR version is because we get rid of the |
timeit
benchmark with my script:inspect_bench.py
:Result: 2.0s -> 1.18s = x1.74 as fast
re
uses #130167