#10295: Upgrading pexpect
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
       Reporter:  SimonKing          |        Owner:  was
           Type:  enhancement        |       Status:  new
       Priority:  major              |    Milestone:  sage-6.7
      Component:  interfaces         |   Resolution:
       Keywords:  pexpect upgrade    |    Merged in:
        Authors:                     |    Reviewers:
Report Upstream:  N/A                |  Work issues:
         Branch:                     |       Commit:
  u/fbissey/pexpect3.3               |  a24eab3ce985874ab8445ed5e362bbeead76fd40
   Dependencies:                     |     Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by fbissey):

 Replying to [comment:43 leif]:
 > Replying to [comment:37 bpage]:
 > > Apparently the performance problem originates with this old commit:
 > >
 > >
 
https://github.com/pexpect/pexpect/commit/600463686284ea102548f5e0bf51582db051dc78
 #diff-dfb232b43530f0961894e09a0d862aa4R1048
 > >
 > > after commenting out
 > >
 > > https://github.com/pexpect/pexpect/blob/3.x/pexpect/__init__.py#L1540
 > >
 > > {{{
 > >                 #time.sleep(0.0001)
 > > }}}
 >
 > Hahaha, I was going to grab 2.1 and investigate the changes compared to
 2.0.  (Didn't realize the full history was kept.)
 >
 >
 > Of course continually polling without delay isn't nice either; it will
 significantly increase the CPU load.

 Will it? After all unless there are quite a number of other changes, it is
 the current situation with 2.0, isn't it? Upgrading without patching would
 decrease the CPU load if I am not mistaken.


 Anyway, I like Jeroen's idea but we will need to upgrade pexpect in any
 case. I am all in favour of upgrading now with a patch and working on some
 cythonized elements for pexpect in a follow up ticket. We could remove the
 patch when we have something satisfactory in place.

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10295#comment:44>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to