Merge pull request #2360 from gabrieldemarmiesse/test_profiling_tutorial_5

Added tests to "profiling tutorial" part 5

docs/examples/tutorial/profiling_tutorial/calc_pi_4.pyx

+# cython: profile=True
+
+# calc_pi.pyx
+
+cimport cython
+
+@cython.profile(False)
+cdef inline double recip_square(int i):
+    return 1. / (i * i)
+
+def approx_pi(int n=10000000):
+    cdef double val = 0.
+    cdef int k
+    for k in range(1, n + 1):
+        val += recip_square(k)
+    return (6 * val) ** .5

docs/src/tutorial/profiling_tutorial.rst

@@ -238,24 +238,9 @@ That bought us another 1.8 seconds. Not the dramatic change we could have
 expected. And why is recip_square still in this table; it is supposed to be
 inlined, isn't it?  The reason for this is that Cython still generates profiling code
 even if the function call is eliminated. Let's tell it to not
-profile recip_square any more; we couldn't get the function to be much faster anyway::
+profile recip_square any more; we couldn't get the function to be much faster anyway:
 
-   # encoding: utf-8
-   # cython: profile=True
-   # filename: calc_pi.pyx
-
-   cimport cython
-
-   @cython.profile(False)
-   cdef inline double recip_square(int i):
-       return 1./(i*i)
-
-   def approx_pi(int n=10000000):
-       cdef double val = 0.
-       cdef int k
-       for k in xrange(1,n+1):
-           val += recip_square(k)
-       return (6 * val)**.5
+.. literalinclude:: ../../examples/tutorial/profiling_tutorial/calc_pi_4.pyx
 
 Running this shows an interesting result: