On Thu, 2018-07-05 at 08:48 -0700, Dylan Baker wrote: > I've asked a couple of people who have (in the past at least) had a > hard requirement on python 2.x if moving to 3.x will be okay for > them. If it's not then we may need to do something else here. I've > used six in the past (although I know a lot of other pythonistas > don't like six), so that would be an option I think. > > While this works fine, it's going to create a lot of overhead for > anyone using python 2, since some of these data structures are huge, > and returning a copy (or copy of a copy) is going to be fairly > expensive. If we can drop python 2 support that of course isn't a > problem.
I tested the scripts with Python 2 as well, and they didn't seem to take significantly more time to complete. (I didn't look at memory consumption though, which is a bit hard for scripts running so fast) Are some of those platforms that require Python 2 very low-performance ones, where it would have an actual impact? I have a very slow ARM machine handy, I can try and see whether the patches make a big difference there if it helps? > Assuming that those people are okay with python 3, If everyone is ok moving fully to Python 3, then the patch series could be quite different and simpler. ^_^ -- Mathieu _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev