This is a super brief blog post responding to an issue that we got on the PyPy issue tracker. I am moving my response to the blog (with permission of the submitter) to have a post to point to, since it's a problem that comes up with some regularity. It's also documented on our page of differences between PyPy and CPython but I thought an additional blog post might be good.
The issue pointed out that a small program that operates on strings is much slower on PyPy compared to CPython. The program is a solution for 2016's Advent of Code Day 16 and looks like this:
def dragon(a): b = a[::-1].replace('0','r').replace('1','0').replace('r','1') return a+'0'+b def diffstr(a): b = "" for i in range(0,len(a),2): b += ['0','1'][a[i] == a[i+1]] return b def iterdiff(a): b = a while(len(b) % 2 == 0): b = diffstr(b) return b size = 35651584 initstate = '10010000000110000' while(len(initstate) < size): initstate = dragon(initstate) initstate = initstate[:size] print(iterdiff(initstate))
The submitter pointed out, that the program is fast on CPython (~8s on my laptop) and slow (didn't finish) on PyPy.
The reason for the performance difference is that
+= on strings in a loop
has quadratic complexity in PyPy, which is what
diffstr does. To see the
quadraticness, consider that to add a character at the end of the string, the
beginning of the string needs to be copied into a new chunk of memory. If the
n times, that means there are
1 + 2 + 3 + ... + n = n * (n + 1) // 2
Repeated string concatenations are in principle also quadratic in CPython, but CPython has an optimization that makes them sometimes not quadratic, which is what makes this program not too slow in CPython.
In order to fix the problem on PyPy it's best to use a list for the string
parts, which has the right amortized O(1) complexity for
.append calls, and
str.join after the loop:
With this change the program becomes a little bit faster on CPython for me, and on PyPy it stops being quadratic and runs in ~3.5s.
In general, it's best not to rely on the presence of this optimization in CPython either. Sometimes, a small innocent looking changes will break CPython's optimization. E.g. this useless change makes CPython also take ages:
The reason why this change breaks the optimization in CPython is that it only
triggers if the reference count of
b is 1, in which case it uses
on the string. The change is unrealistic of course, but you could imagine a
related that keeps an extra reference to
b for a sensible reason.
Another situation in which the optimization doesn't work is discussed in this StackOverflow question with an answer by Tim Peters.
It's unlikely that PyPy will fix this. We had a prototype how to do it, but it seems very little "production" code uses += on strings in a loop, and the fix makes the strings implementation quite a bit more complex.
So, in summary, don't use repeated concatenations in a loop!