On Sat, Sep 3, 2016, 17:45 Yury Selivanov <yselivanov...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > But without that new API (basically what Christian proposed) you'd > > need > > to iterate over the list in order to find the object that belongs to > > Pyjion. > > > > > > Yes. > > Yeah, which means the same for my opcode patch... Which unfortunately > will make things slower :( > > > If we manage to implement my opcode caching idea, we'll have at > > least two known users of co_extra. Without a way to claim a > > particular > > index in co_extra you will have some overhead to locate your objects. > > > > > > Two things. One, I would want any new API to start with an underscore > > so people know we can and will change its semantics as necessary. Two, > > Guido would have to re-accept the PEP as this is a shift in the use of > > the field if this is how people want to go. > > > Since this isn't a user-facing/public API feature, are we *really* > forced to accept/implement the PEP before the beta? > I say yes since people could want to use it during the beta for testing (it's Ned's call in the end, though). > I'd be happy to spend some time tomorrow/Monday to hammer out an > alternative approach to co_extra. Let's see if we can find a slightly > better approach. > OK! -brett > Yury >
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
