Why is Python faster than C++ in this case?

Question

A program in both Python and C++ is given below, which performs the following task: read white-space delimited words from stdin, print the unique words sorted by string length along with a count of each unique word to stdout. The format for a line of the output is: length, count, word.

For exmaple, with this input file (488kB of a thesaurus) http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=NeUBQ22T

The output, with formatting, is this:

1 57 "
1 1 n
1 1 )
1 3 *
1 18 ,
1 7 -
1 1 R
1 13 .
1 2 1
1 1 S
1 5 2
1 1 3
1 2 4
1 2 &
1 91 %
1 1 5
1 1 6
1 1 7
1 1 8
1 2 9
1 16 ;
1 2 =
1 5 A
1 1 C
1 5 e
1 3 E
1 1 G
1 11 I
1 1 L
1 4 N
1 681 a
1 2 y
1 1 P
2 1 67
2 1 y;
2 1 P-
2 85 no
2 9 ne
2 779 of
2 1 n;
...

Here is the program in C++

#include <vector>
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <set>
#include <map>

bool compare_strlen (const std::string &lhs, const std::string &rhs) {
  return (lhs.length() < rhs.length());
}

int main (int argc, char *argv[]) {
  std::string str;
  std::vector<std::string> words;

  /* Extract words from the input file, splitting on whitespace */
  while (std::cin >> str) {
    words.push_back(str);
  }

  /* Extract unique words and count the number of occurances of each word */
  std::set<std::string> unique_words;
  std::map<std::string,int> word_count; 
  for (std::vector<std::string>::iterator it = words.begin();
       it != words.end(); ++it) {
    unique_words.insert(*it);
    word_count[*it]++;
  }

  words.clear();
  std::copy(unique_words.begin(), unique_words.end(),
            std::back_inserter(words));

  // Sort by word length 
  std::sort(words.begin(), words.end(), compare_strlen);

  // Print words with length and number of occurances
  for (std::vector<std::string>::iterator it = words.begin();
       it != words.end(); ++it) {
    std::cout << it->length() << " " << word_count[*it]  << " " <<
              *it << std::endl;
  }

  return 0;
}

Here is the Program in Python:

import fileinput
from collections import defaultdict

words = set()
count = {}
for line in fileinput.input():
  line_words = line.split()
  for word in line_words:
    if word not in words:
      words.add(word)
      count[word] = 1
    else:
      count[word] += 1 

words = list(words)
words.sort(key=len)

for word in words:
  print len(word), count[word], word

For the C++ program, the compiler used was g++ 4.9.0 with the -O3 flag.

The version of Python used was 2.7.3

Time taken for the C++ program:

time ./main > measure-and-count.txt < ~/Documents/thesaurus/thesaurus.txt

real    0m0.687s
user    0m0.559s
sys     0m0.123s

Time taken for the Python program:

time python main.py > measure-and-count.txt < ~/Documents/thesaurus/thesaurus.txt

real    0m0.369s
user    0m0.308s
sys     0m0.029s

The Python program is much faster than the C++ program, and is relatively even faster with larger input sizes. What's going on here? Is my use of the C++ STL incorrect?

Edit: As suggested by a comment and an answer, I changed the C++ program to use std::unordered_set and std::unordered_map .

The following lines were changed

#include <unordered_set>
#include <unordered_map>

...

std::unordered_set<std::string> unique_words;
std::unordered_map<std::string,int> word_count;

The compilation command:

g++-4.9 -std=c++11 -O3 -o main main.cpp

This improved performance only marginally:

time ./main > measure-and-count.txt < ~/Documents/thesaurus/thesaurus.txt

real    0m0.604s
user    0m0.479s
sys     0m0.122s

Edit2: A much faster program in C++

This is a combination of NetVipeC's solution, Dieter Lücking's solution, and the top answer to this question . The real performance killer was cin using an unbuffered read by default. Solved with std::cin.sync_with_stdio(false); . This solution also uses a single container, taking advantage of the ordered map in C++.

#include <vector>
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <set>
#include <map>

struct comparer_strlen {
    bool operator()(const std::string& lhs, const std::string& rhs) const {
        if (lhs.length() == rhs.length())
            return lhs < rhs;
        return lhs.length() < rhs.length();
    }
};

int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
    std::cin.sync_with_stdio(false);

    std::string str;

    typedef std::map<std::string, int, comparer_strlen> word_count_t;

    /* Extract words from the input file, splitting on whitespace */
    /* Extract unique words and count the number of occurances of each word */
    word_count_t word_count;
    while (std::cin >> str) {
        word_count[str]++;
    }

    // Print words with length and number of occurances
    for (word_count_t::iterator it = word_count.begin();
         it != word_count.end(); ++it) {
        std::cout << it->first.length() << " " << it->second << " "
                  << it->first << '\n';
    }

    return 0;
}

Runtime

time ./main3 > measure-and-count.txt < ~/Documents/thesaurus/thesaurus.txt

real    0m0.106s
user    0m0.091s
sys     0m0.012s

Edit3: A nice and concise version of the Python program was provided by Daniel, it runs in about the same time as the version above:

import fileinput
from collections import Counter

count = Counter(w for line in fileinput.input() for w in line.split())

for word in sorted(count, key=len):
  print len(word), count[word], word

Runtime:

time python main2.py > measure-and-count.txt.py < ~/Documents/thesaurus/thesaurus.txt

real    0m0.342s
user    0m0.312s
sys     0m0.027s

Answer 1

Test with this, it must be faster than the original C++.

Changes are:

• Eliminated the vector words to save the words (there will be saved already in word_count).
• Eliminated the set unique_words (in word_count are only the unique words).
• Eliminated the second copy to words, not needed.

• Eliminated the sort of the words (the order was updated in the map, now the words in the map are order by length and the words with same length are lexicographically order.

   #include <vector> #include <string> #include <iostream> #include <set> #include <map> struct comparer_strlen_functor { operator()(const std::string& lhs, const std::string& rhs) const { if (lhs.length() == rhs.length()) return lhs < rhs; return lhs.length() < rhs.length(); } }; int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { std::cin.sync_with_stdio(false); std::string str; typedef std::map<std::string, int, comparer_strlen_functor> word_count_t; /* Extract words from the input file, splitting on whitespace */ /* Extract unique words and count the number of occurances of each word */ word_count_t word_count; while (std::cin >> str) { word_count[str]++; } // Print words with length and number of occurances for (word_count_t::iterator it = word_count.begin(); it != word_count.end(); ++it) { std::cout << it->first.length() << " " << it->second << " " << it->first << "\\n"; } return 0; } 

New version of the reading loop, to read line by line and split. Need #include <boost/algorithm/string/split.hpp>

while (std::getline(std::cin, str)) {
    for (string_split_iterator It = boost::make_split_iterator(
             str, boost::first_finder(" ", boost::is_iequal()));
         It != string_split_iterator(); ++It) {
        if (It->end() - It->begin() != 0)
            word_count[boost::copy_range<std::string>(*It)]++;
    }
}

Testing in Core i5, 8GB RAM, GCC 4.9.0, 32bits, run in 238ms. Updated the code with std::cin.sync_with_stdio(false); and \\n as proposed.

Answer 2

Making three changes, omitting the extra vector (which you not have in python), reserve memory for the word-vector and avoiding the endl (!) in the output:

#include <algorithm>
#include <vector>
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <set>
#include <map>

bool compare_strlen (const std::string &lhs, const std::string &rhs) {
  return (lhs.length() < rhs.length());
}

int main (int argc, char *argv[]) {
    /* Extract words from the input file, splitting on whitespace */
    /* Also count the number of occurances of each word */
    std::map<std::string, int> word_count;
    {
        std::string str;
        while (std::cin >> str) {
            ++word_count[str];
        }
    }

    std::vector<std::string> words;
    words.reserve(word_count.size());
    for(std::map<std::string, int>::const_iterator w = word_count.begin();
        w != word_count.end();
        ++w)
    {
        words.push_back(w->first);
    }

    // Sort by word length
    std::sort(words.begin(), words.end(), compare_strlen);

    // Print words with length and number of occurances
    for (std::vector<std::string>::iterator it = words.begin();
       it != words.end();
       ++it)
    {
        std::cout << it->length() << " " << word_count[*it]  << " " <<
                  *it << '\n';
    }
    return 0;
}

Gives:

Original:

real    0m0.230s
user    0m0.224s
sys 0m0.004s

Improved:

real    0m0.140s
user    0m0.132s
sys 0m0.004s

More Improved by adding std::cin.sync_with_stdio(false); See OregonTrail's question):

real    0m0.107s
user    0m0.100s
sys 0m0.004s

And NetVipeC's solution with std::cin.sync_with_stdio(false); and the replacement of std::endl by '\\n':

real    0m0.077s
user    0m0.072s
sys 0m0.004s

Python:

real    0m0.146s
user    0m0.136s
sys 0m0.008s

Answer 3

  std::vector<std::string> words;

  /* Extract words from the input file, splitting on whitespace */
  while (std::cin >> str) {
    words.push_back(str);
  }

This requires constantly repeating allocate/copy/free operations as the vector grows. Either pre-allocate the vector or use something like a list.

Answer 4

There are a few problems with your C++ code.

First, you are using mutable strings. Which means you are copying them around a bunch. (Python strings are immutable). Testing for this, I find the effect can actually make the C++ code slower, so lets drop this one.

Second, unordered_ containers are probably a good idea. Testing this, I get a 1/3 speedup by swapping them in/out (using boost::hash algorithm for hashing).

Third, your use of std::endl flushes std::cout on each line. That seems silly.

Forth, std::cin.sync_with_stdio(false); to reduce overhead of std::cin , or don't use them.

Fifth, directly construct the set and map from io, don't round-trip through a std::vector needlessly.

Here is a test program (with hard coded data of about 1/4th the size) with immutable strings ( std::shared_ptr<const std::string> ) and unordered_ containers with manual hash setups, and a few C++11 features to make the code a bit shorter.

Strip out the large R"( string literal, and replace the stringstream with std::cin .

For more performance, don't use the heavy-weight streaming objects. They do a lot of really, really paranoid work.

Answer 5

Here's yet another C++ version that I believe more closely matches the python line-by-line. It attempts to retain the same types of containers and operations found in the python version, with obvious C++ specific tweaks. Note that I lifted the sync_with_stdio optimization from the other answers.

#include <iostream>
#include <unordered_set>
#include <unordered_map>
#include <list>

#include <sstream>
#include <iterator>


bool compare_strlen(const std::string &lhs, const std::string &rhs)
{
    return lhs.length() < rhs.length();
}

int main (int argc, char *argv[]) {
    std::unordered_set<std::string> words;
    std::unordered_map<std::string, std::size_t> count;

    // Make std::cin use its own buffer to improve I/O performance.
    std::cin.sync_with_stdio(false);

    // Extract words from the input file line-by-line, splitting on
    // whitespace
    char line[128] = {};  // Yes, std::vector or std::array would work, too.
    while (std::cin.getline(line, sizeof(line) / sizeof(line[0]))) {
        // Tokenize
        std::istringstream line_stream(line);
        std::istream_iterator<std::string> const end;
        for(std::istream_iterator<std::string> i(line_stream);
            i != end;
            ++i) {
            words.insert(*i);
            count[*i]++;
        }
    }

    std::list<std::string> words_list(words.begin(), words.end());
    words_list.sort(compare_strlen);

    // Print words with length and number of occurences
    for (auto const & word : words_list)
        std::cout << word.length()
                  << ' ' << count[word]
                  << ' ' << word
                  << '\n';

    return 0;
}

The results are comparable to your original python code and @NetVipeC's C++.

C++

real    0m0.979s
user    0m0.080s
sys     0m0.016s

Python

real    0m0.993s
user    0m0.112s
sys     0m0.060s

I was a bit surprised this version of the C++ performed comparably to the other streamlined C++ answers to your question, since I thought for sure things like the stringstream based tokenizing would be a bottleneck.

Answer 6

Both std::set and std::map are optimized for lookups, not insertion. They must be sorted/tree-balanced every time you change the contents. You might try using std::unordered_set and std::unordered_map which are hash-based and would be faster for your use case.