On 30/11/2007, Christian Heimes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul Moore got some Cygwin developers persuaded to implement support for
msvcr90 [1]. The coded was added a few days ago [2]. This means that
users are still able to use MinGW to compile extensions when we switch
to VS 2008 as default
On Nov 30, 2007, at 6:05 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
It's almost as if nobody has seen my proposal to leave __builtins__
alone and rename the __builtin__ module instead.
I suspect that's indistinguishable from everyone being tired of the
discussion, knowing that you're going to pick
On Nov 30, 2007 3:59 PM, Greg Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Terry Reedy wrote:
The only problem would be if someone put
the incantation into a non-main module named 'main.py', but the same is
true today of '__main__.py'. And I would consider either a buggy practice.
I often put the real
On Nov 30, 2007 12:02 PM, Neil Toronto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On both of my systems, using -O2 reduces execution time in pystone by 9%
and in pybench by 8%. It's function inlining: -O3
-fno-inline-functions works just as well as -O2. Removing -g has
little effect on the result.
Systems:
On Nov 30, 2007 3:16 PM, Fred Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007, at 6:05 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
It's almost as if nobody has seen my proposal to leave __builtins__
alone and rename the __builtin__ module instead.
I suspect that's indistinguishable from everyone being
Terry Reedy wrote:
The only problem would be if someone put
the incantation into a non-main module named 'main.py', but the same is
true today of '__main__.py'. And I would consider either a buggy practice.
I often put the real main code into a separate module, so
that it gets compiled to a
On Nov 30, 2007, at 6:05 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
It's almost as if nobody has seen my proposal to leave __builtins__
alone and rename the __builtin__ module instead.
Fred Drake wrote:
+1 for a module named builtin, or something similarly obscure.
On Nov 30, 2007 3:42 PM, Neil
Fred Drake wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007, at 6:05 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
It's almost as if nobody has seen my proposal to leave __builtins__
alone and rename the __builtin__ module instead.
I suspect that's indistinguishable from everyone being tired of the
discussion, knowing that you're
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Nov 30, 2007, at 6:05 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007 2:17 PM, Nicko van Someren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for __universal__
It's almost as if nobody has seen my proposal to leave __builtins__
alone and rename the __builtin__
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 03:05:18PM -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007 2:17 PM, Nicko van Someren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for __universal__
It's almost as if nobody has seen my proposal to leave __builtins__
alone and rename the __builtin__ module instead.
I saw it, and I
Thing is that universal is an adjective and we tend to use nouns
(maybe not by intention) for our modules/objects:
Sys, os, builtins, etc, are all nouns: maybe +1 for __universe__ ? But
when you phrase it that way, it doesn't quite make sense.
Have we considered special syntax for universal py
On Nov 30, 2007 2:17 PM, Nicko van Someren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for __universal__
It's almost as if nobody has seen my proposal to leave __builtins__
alone and rename the __builtin__ module instead.
--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
On 29 Nov 2007, at 14:06, Isaac Morland wrote:
I wonder how much you could sell the naming rights for? i.e. call it
__[name of sponsor]__. Python's pretty popular, such advertising
should
be worth something
I'm sorry, but if you call it __Microsoft_Office_2007__ I shall never
write
On Nov 30, 2007 7:16 PM, Brett Cannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007 12:02 PM, Neil Toronto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On both of my systems, using -O2 reduces execution time in pystone by 9%
and in pybench by 8%. It's function inlining: -O3
-fno-inline-functions works just as well
Steve Holden wrote:
Neil Toronto wrote:
Speaking of which, here's a question for everybody. I was wondering
whether 64 bits is necessary. It takes an hour of concerted effort -
nothing but module.d = 1; del module.d for an hour straight - to
overflow a 32-bit version number. Is anybody
This looks good. Please make the appropriate changes to the PEP and to
PEP 0 to mark it as accepted.
I think the implementation is fine too (others will have to check it
more carefully) but I noticed that the promised functionality of -m
doesn't work yet: I created a file Lib/test/foo.py whose
Paul Moore got some Cygwin developers persuaded to implement support for
msvcr90 [1]. The coded was added a few days ago [2]. This means that
users are still able to use MinGW to compile extensions when we switch
to VS 2008 as default compiler on Windows.
I'm not sure how many people are
2007/11/24, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Did you change the Decimal repr to use the same format for the mantissa?
I don't understand the question. The output of repr() does not show
this internals...
Could you also check the performance gain against the telco benchmark
which is in the
Greg Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| I think the situation with __main__ is different from __builtin__,
I effectively agreed by not disputing Guido's response ;-)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
Oleg Broytmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 11:22:03AM +1300, Greg Ewing wrote:
The next step up from global would be __galactic__.
Let me skip __universe[al]__ and go directly to The Ultimate
Questions:
So maybe it should be called __42__?
Bernhard
Neil Toronto wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
Hm.
On my Linux box, in the trunk:
Before the patch:
Pystone(1.1) time for 5 passes = 1.16
This machine benchmarks at 43103.4 pystones/second
After the patch:
Pystone(1.1) time for 5 passes = 1.14
This machine benchmarks at 43859.6
On both of my systems, using -O2 reduces execution time in pystone by 9%
and in pybench by 8%. It's function inlining: -O3
-fno-inline-functions works just as well as -O2. Removing -g has
little effect on the result.
Systems:
- AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4600+, 512 KB cache (desktop)
-
On Nov 30, 2007 4:40 PM, Oleg Broytmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 03:05:18PM -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007 2:17 PM, Nicko van Someren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+1 for __universal__
It's almost as if nobody has seen my proposal to leave __builtins__
At 06:16 PM 11/30/2007 -0500, Fred Drake wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007, at 6:05 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
It's almost as if nobody has seen my proposal to leave __builtins__
alone and rename the __builtin__ module instead.
I suspect that's indistinguishable from everyone being tired of the
Neal Norwitz wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007 7:16 PM, Brett Cannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 30, 2007 12:02 PM, Neil Toronto [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On both of my systems, using -O2 reduces execution time in pystone by 9%
and in pybench by 8%. It's function inlining: -O3
-fno-inline-functions
Neil Toronto wrote:
[...]
If you're going to run these benchmarks yourself, make sure you make
clean before building with different options. (I don't know why it's
necessary, but it is.)
Because the dependencies evaluated by make don't take into account the
different options that were used
[Sorry, the send key pressed itself there]
Touching the sources should also work, and is a little quicker (but this
is usually only practical for small projects).
regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden+1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
27 matches
Mail list logo
