STINNER Victor added the comment: Output of attached profiler_c_code.py example: --- haypo@selma$ ./python profiler_c_code.py (<frame object at 0xf9d788>, 'call', None) (<frame object at 0xf9d788>, 'return', 'h') (<frame object at 0xf9d788>, 'call', None) (<frame object at 0xf9d788>, 'return', 'e') (<frame object at 0xf9d788>, 'call', None) (<frame object at 0xf9d788>, 'return', 'l') (<frame object at 0xf9d788>, 'call', None) (<frame object at 0xf9d788>, 'return', 'l') (<frame object at 0xf9d788>, 'call', None) (<frame object at 0xf9d788>, 'return', 'o') (<frame object at 0xf9d498>, 'c_call', <built-in function setprofile>) ---
Except of sys.setprofile(), the profiler doesn't see any C calls! list() and map() are simply "hidden". So tools like coverage miss a lot of C call? Again, is it a compromise between performance and correctness, or just a regular bug? ---------- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file46604/profiler_c_code.py _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue29502> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
