Re: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up function calls)

On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 10:30 +1100, Donovan Baarda wrote: > On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 15:16 -0500, Nathan Binkert wrote: > > > Wouldn't it be nicer to have a facility that let you send messages > > > between processes and manage concurrency properly instead? You'll need [...] > A quick google search re

Re: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up function calls)

On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 15:16 -0500, Nathan Binkert wrote: > > Wouldn't it be nicer to have a facility that let you send messages > > between processes and manage concurrency properly instead? You'll need > > most of this anyway to do multithreading sanely, and the benefit to the > > multiple proces

Re: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up function calls)

> Wouldn't it be nicer to have a facility that let you send messages > between processes and manage concurrency properly instead? You'll need > most of this anyway to do multithreading sanely, and the benefit to the > multiple process model is that you can scale to multiple machines, not > just pr

[Python-Dev] python-dev Summary for 2004-12-16 through 2004-12-31 [draft]

Nice and short summary this time. Plan to send this off Wednesday or Thursday so get corrections in before then. -- = Summary Announcements = You can still `register `__ for `PyCo

Re: [Python-Dev] linux executable - how?

On Mon, Jan 31, 2005, apocalypznow wrote: > > How can I take my python scripts and create a linux executable out of it > (to be distributed without having to also distribute python) ? python-dev is for discussion of patches and bugs to Python itself. Please post your question on comp.lang.python.

[Python-Dev] linux executable - how?

How can I take my python scripts and create a linux executable out of it (to be distributed without having to also distribute python) ? ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: ht

[Python-Dev] Re: Moving towards Python 3.0

Evan Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Jan 31, 2005, at 0:17, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> The "just kidding" applies to the whole list, right? None of these >> strike me as good ideas, except for improvements to function argument >> passing. > > Really? You see no advantage to moving to garbag

Re: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up function calls)

Barry Warsaw wrote: I've heard rumors that SF was going to be making svn available. Anybody know more about that? I'd be +1 on moving from cvs to svn. It was on their "things we do in 2005" list. 2005 isn't over yet... I wouldn't be surprised if it gets moved to their "things we do in 2006" list

Re: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up function calls)

Evan Jones wrote: The next page has a micro-benchmark that shows reference counting performing very poorly. Not to mention that Python has a garbage collector *anyway,* so wouldn't it make sense to get rid of the reference counting? It's not clear what these numbers exactly mean, but I don't bel

RE: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up functioncalls)

On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 08:51 -0800, Michael Chermside wrote: > However, remember that changing away from reference counting is a change > to the semantics of CPython. Right now, people can (and often do) assume > that objects which don't participate in a reference loop are collected > as soon as th

Re: [Python-Dev] Re: PEP 309

Paul Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Also, while looking at patches I noticed 1077106. It doesn't apply to > me - I don't use Linux - but it looks like this may have simply been > forgotten. The last comment is in December from from Michael Hudson, > saying in effect "I'll commit this tomorrow

RE: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up functioncalls)

Michael> CPython CAN leverage such environments, and it IS used that Michael> way. However, this requires using multiple Python processes Michael> and inter-process communication of some sort (there are lots of Michael> choices, take your pick). It's a technique which is more

RE: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up functioncalls)

Evan Jones writes: > My knowledge about garbage collection is weak, but I have read a little > bit of Hans Boehm's work on garbage collection. [...] The biggest > disadvantage mentioned is that simple pointer assignments end up > becoming "increment ref count" operations as well... Hans Boehm cert

[Python-Dev] Re: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: Speed up functioncalls)

Bob Ippolito wrote: > Wouldn't it be nicer to have a facility that let you send messages between > processes and manage > concurrency properly instead? You'll need most of this anyway to do > multithreading sanely, and > the benefit to the multiple process model is that you can scale to multi

Re: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up function calls)

On Jan 31, 2005, at 10:43, Evan Jones wrote: On Jan 31, 2005, at 0:17, Guido van Rossum wrote: The "just kidding" applies to the whole list, right? None of these strike me as good ideas, except for improvements to function argument passing. Really? You see no advantage to moving to garbage collecti

Re: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up function calls)

On Jan 31, 2005, at 0:17, Guido van Rossum wrote: The "just kidding" applies to the whole list, right? None of these strike me as good ideas, except for improvements to function argument passing. Really? You see no advantage to moving to garbage collection, nor allowing Python to leverage multiple

RE: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up function calls)

On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 00:00, Skip Montanaro wrote: > Raymond> I had hoped for the core of p3k to be built for scratch ... > > Then we should just create a new CVS module for it (or go whole hog and try > a new revision control system altogether - svn, darcs, arch, whatever). I've heard rumors

Re: Moving towards Python 3.0 (was Re: [Python-Dev] Speed up function calls)

On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 00:17, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > I had hoped for the core of p3k to be built for scratch [...] > > Stop right there. Phew! -Barry signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Python-Dev mailing list P