For now, I'm following the mailing-lists from a spy-glass: I don't read
most of the e-mails.
However, this thread seems to be infected: I can smell from here your
emotions behind your words.
Why to push a lot of emotions inside a technical discussion ?
What's the nerves have been hit with this
On 05/30/2015 07:26 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Porting performance features from python 3 to python 2 has the
disadvantage of cutting into a compelling business case for users to
move forward to python 3.[1] so doing this has a cost to python 3
adoption. But, the question is whether there
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
The buildbots currently live in a state of denial about the 3.5 branch.
Could someone whisper tenderly in their collective shell-like ears so that
they start building 3.5, in addition to 3.4 and trunk?
The 3.5 branch
On 31 May 2015 04:20, Ludovic Gasc gml...@gmail.com wrote:
For now, I'm following the mailing-lists from a spy-glass: I don't read
most of the e-mails.
However, this thread seems to be infected: I can smell from here your
emotions behind your words.
Why to push a lot of emotions inside a
Nick Coghlan wrote:
We've long had a requirement that certain kinds of proposal come with
at least nominal support commitments from the folks proposing them
(e.g. adding modules to the standard library, supporting new
platforms). Institutions with a clear financial interest in a
particular
On 31 May 2015 at 09:20, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
On 05/30/2015 07:26 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Porting performance features from python 3 to python 2 has the disadvantage
of cutting into a compelling business case for users to move forward to
python 3.[1] so doing this has
On 31 May 2015 at 08:37, Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
Nick Coghlan wrote:
We've long had a requirement that certain kinds of proposal come with
at least nominal support commitments from the folks proposing them
(e.g. adding modules to the standard library, supporting new
On 30 May 2015 10:46, Alexander Walters tritium-l...@sdamon.com wrote:
Python is a giant cache-miss generator. A little performance boost on the
opt-code dispatch isn't going to change that much. If we really do care
about improving python to do less environmental damage, then that is a
Isn't it a time to assign release manager for 3.6-3.7?
___
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
On Sat, 30 May 2015 18:55:20 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30 May 2015 10:46, Alexander Walters tritium-l...@sdamon.com wrote:
Python is a giant cache-miss generator. A little performance boost on the
opt-code dispatch isn't going to change that much. If we really do
On Sat, 30 May 2015 20:52:21 +1000
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
Suppose someone came up with a magic patch that makes the CPython core
run 25% faster. No downsides, just 25% faster across the board. I
wouldn't pay money for it on the sole basis of expecting to make that
back in
On 30 May 2015 at 20:58, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 30 May 2015 18:55:20 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30 May 2015 10:46, Alexander Walters tritium-l...@sdamon.com wrote:
Python is a giant cache-miss generator. A little performance boost on the
Antoine Pitrou writes:
On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200
Christian Heimes christ...@python.org wrote:
For performance patches we have to consider our responsibility for the
environment. Every improvement means more speed and less power
consumption. Python runs of hundreds of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 2015-05-30 14:03, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
No, it's up to the proponent to prove that the effect exists, with
a magnitude large enough to make any interesting difference. That's
part of the process when suggesting a change.
If it doesn't, or
On Sat, 30 May 2015 10:34:15 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30 May 2015 09:57, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200
Christian Heimes christ...@python.org wrote:
For performance patches we have to consider our responsibility for the
On 30 May 2015 at 20:35, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 30 May 2015 10:34:15 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30 May 2015 09:57, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200
Christian Heimes christ...@python.org wrote:
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 30 May 2015 20:52:21 +1000
Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
Suppose someone came up with a magic patch that makes the CPython core
run 25% faster. No downsides, just 25% faster across the board. I
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 30 May 2015 10:34:15 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30 May 2015 09:57, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200
Christian Heimes christ...@python.org
On Sat, 30 May 2015 21:20:56 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Given the extensive complaints about the lack of corporate
contribution to upstream CPython maintenance, the hostile reaction to
a concrete proposal for such ongoing contributions has been both
incredibly surprising
Le 30/05/2015 13:51, Stephen J. Turnbull a écrit :
Antoine Pitrou writes:
On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200
Christian Heimes christ...@python.org wrote:
For performance patches we have to consider our responsibility for the
environment. Every improvement means more speed and less
On 30 May 2015 at 21:37, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 30 May 2015 21:20:56 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Given the extensive complaints about the lack of corporate
contribution to upstream CPython maintenance, the hostile reaction to
a concrete proposal for
Hi Christian,
Antoine,
now your are putting it over the top. You make it sound like I'm some
crazy environmentalist or eco-warrior. Well, I'm not.
I apologize for misrepresenting your position.
I still don't think discussing environmental matters is really
productive here, though :-)
Who said anything about funding? this is a thread about the patch Intel
offered (and had committed).
And that's the point. This is the thread about THAT patch. Why are we
hijacking this topic for an environmental debate? If it is a legitimate
topic (which it might be), discuss it in its
Antoine Pitrou writes:
In a community of volunteers, ideology is typically a great
motivator.
If and only everyone agrees on it.
That, my friend, is *your* ideology speaking. Some people work on
open source to scratch technical itches -- the program doesn't do what
they want, they're
On May 30, 2015 1:56 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Being ready, willing and able to handle the kind of situation created
by the Python 2-3 community transition is a large part of what it
means to offer commercial support for community driven open source
projects, as it buys
On May 30, 2015, at 06:55 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Intel are looking to get involved in CPython core development
*specifically* to work on performance improvements, so it's important
to offer folks in the community good reasons for why we're OK with
seeing at least some of that work applied to
26 matches
Mail list logo
