Hi Brett, hi Floris,
On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 04:12:28PM -0800, Brett Cannon wrote:
Just for everyone's FYI while we are talking about profilers, Floris
Bruynooghe (who I am cc'ing on this so he can contribute to the
conversation), for Google's Summer of Code, wrote a replacement for
On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 12:14 +0100, Armin Rigo wrote:
Still, people generally agree that profile.py, while taking a longer
time overall, gives more meaningful results than hotshot. Now Brett's
student, Floris, extended hotshot to allow custom timers. This is
essential, because it enables
Hi Barry,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 11:40:37AM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
Hi Armin. Actually it was SF #900092 that I was referring to.
Ah, we're talking about different things then. The patch in SF #900092
is not related to hotshot, it's just ceval.c not producing enough events
to allow a
On 11/21/05, Jeremy Hylton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's another attempt to disentagle some issues:
- Should lsprof be added to the standard distribution?
- Should hotshot be removed from the standard distribution?
These two aren't at all related, unless you believe that two is the
maximum
Hi Floris,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 04:41:04PM +, Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
Now Brett's
student, Floris, extended hotshot to allow custom timers. This is
essential, because it enables testing. The timing parts of hotshot were
not tested previously.
Don't be too enthousiastic here.
Ben Decker wrote:
I think the port has beed supported for three years now. I am not
sure what kind of commitment you are looking for, but the patch and
software are supplied under the same terms of liability and warranty
as anything else under the GPL.
That (licensed under GPL) would be an
Hi Floris,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 04:45:03PM +, Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
Afaik I did test recursive calls etc.
It seems to show up in any test case I try, e.g.
import hprofile
def wait(m):
if m 0:
wait(m-1)
def f(n):
wait(n)
if n 1:
Armin Rigo wrote:
I see no incremental way of fixing some of the downsides of hotshot,
like its huge log file size and loading time.
I haven't looked into the details myself, but it appears that some
google-summer-of-code contributor has found some way of fixing it.
I doubt people often find
Jeremy Hylton jeremy at alum.mit.edu
Should lsprof be added to the standard distribution?
Should hotshot be removed from the standard distribution?
These two aren't at all related, unless you believe that two is the
maximum number of profiles allowed per Python distribution.
One is a
Brett Cannon wrote:
But this worry, in my mind, is alleviated since I believe both Michael
and Armin are willing to maintain the code. With them both willing to
make sure it stays working (which is a pretty damn good commitment
since we have two core developers willing to keep this going and
Jim Jewett wrote:
Jeremy Hylton jeremy at alum.mit.edu
Should lsprof be added to the standard distribution?
Should hotshot be removed from the standard distribution?
These two aren't at all related, unless you believe that two is the
maximum number of profiles allowed per Python
Neal Norwitz:
I think a bigger bang for the buck would be to buy a Windows box with
Purify. Rational was a real pain to deal with, maybe it's better now
that IBM bought them. Parasoft (Insure++) was even worse to deal
with.
My experience with the other Windows option, BoundsChecker, is
Neal Norwitz wrote:
I think a bigger bang for the buck would be to buy a Windows box with
Purify. Rational was a real pain to deal with, maybe it's better now
that IBM bought them. Parasoft (Insure++) was even worse to deal
with. There would be many other benefits for someone to do more
On 11/21/05, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think there's a shortage of Windows boxes among the python-dev
crowd (I have plenty). Does anyone knows that kind of box you need to
run purify these days ?
Dunno, but it would probably be fine on a reasonably new box with at
least
Brett My question is whether anyone is willing to maintain it in the
Brett stdlib?
My answer is: I'm not sure it matters at this point. There are so many
profiling possibilities, it doesn't seem like we yet know which options are
the best. There is some tacit crowning of best of breed
Greg Stein points out that because of the way the subversion
conversion was done, by-date revision specifications won't
work. Subversion assumes that time is monotonically increasing
over revions numbers - it does a binary search to find out
the revision that immediately precedes(?) the specified
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:36:36 +1300
Tony Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
AST for Python
--
As of October 21st, Python's compiler now uses a real Abstract Syntax
Tree (AST)! This should make experimenting with new syntax much
easier, as well as allowing some
I just checked in the modification below. I'm not sure if this
behaviour is on purpose or by accident. Do we want to support hex
values in floats?
Do we want to support p, similar to e in floats?
Here are the lines from the test:
+self.assertEqual(float( 0x3.1 ), 3.0625)
+
Hi Martin,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 10:29:55PM +0100, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
I see no incremental way of fixing some of the downsides of hotshot,
like its huge log file size and loading time.
I haven't looked into the details myself, but it appears that some
google-summer-of-code
On 11/21/05, Armin Rigo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Martin,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 10:29:55PM +0100, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
I see no incremental way of fixing some of the downsides of hotshot,
like its huge log file size and loading time.
I haven't looked into the details myself, but
20 matches
Mail list logo
