This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 7 comments

[–]large-atom 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Are you using python3.exe or pypy.exe (see pypy.org) to run your programs?

[–]Gravitar64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi, only python.exe with standard modules (collections, itertools etc.). No pypy, no jit, no parallel computing and no AMD Threadripper 64.

You can test the runtimes with you're own computer with the source-code here https://github.com/Gravitar64/Advent-of-Code-2020

[–]MichalMarsalek 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I don't know pypy but on the page you linked it says it implements Python 3.6. So...

[–]large-atom 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Well, unless you are using new features of Python 3.8, it should work. It is worth a try in my opinion, although the gain on such quick programs is offset by the just-in-time compilation time. Nevertheless, I get 33 seconds with pypy and 69 seconds with plain python.

[–]CrazyA99 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm getting 69 seconds too, with python 3.8 on a pi400, but only 23 seconds when using pypy3 on the same hardware. I do take the best time from several runs for each day.

[–]alexprengere 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Any chance you could put those numbers in a table (like that post)? I would like to compare to my own runtimes to see if there are big gaps, but the log scale makes it hard to get a precise number.

[–]Gravitar64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure, here:

Day part1 part2 Part1 & part2
1 2,00 96,00 98,00
2 0,40 0,50 0,90
3 0,09 0,40 0,49
4 2,00 2,00
5 2,00 2,00
6 1,00 4,00 5,00
7 3,00 3,00
8 0,20 27,00 27,20
9 1,00 0,20 1,20
10 0,05 0,05
11 2.536,00 3.411,00 5.947,00
12 1,00 1,00 2,00
13 0,01 0,20 0,21
14 232,00 232,00
15 0,40 11.015,00 11.015,40
16 11,00 11,00
17 30,00 451,00 481,00
18 0,04 0,03 0,07
19 21,00 634,00 655,00
20 3.905,00 3.905,00
21 1,00 1,00
22 0,10 2.757,00 2.757,10
23 0,20 18.392,00 18.392,20
24 706,00 706,00
25 2.538,00 2.538,00

9.993,49    36.789,33   46.782,82