Re: [Python-Dev] A fast startup patch (was: Python startup time)

On May 7, 2018 9:15:32 PM Steve Dower wrote: “the data shows that a focused change to address file system inefficiencies has the potential to broadly and transparently deliver benefit to users without affecting existing code or workflows.” This is consistent with a

Re: [Python-Dev] A fast startup patch (was: Python startup time)

“the data shows that a focused change to address file system inefficiencies has the potential to broadly and transparently deliver benefit to users without affecting existing code or workflows.” This is consistent with a Node.js experiment I heard about where they compiled an entire

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

A moratorium on new features to focus on cleaning up and planning for transition away from the 2.7 compatibility features that still exist? The most obvious being the libraries that we promised not to remove until 2.7 EOL. Top-posted from my Windows phone From: Barry Warsaw Sent: Monday, May

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On 2018-05-07 19:49, Craig Rodrigues wrote: [snip] Would it be reasonable to request a 10 year moratorium on making changes to the core Python language, and for the next 10 years only focus on things that do not require core language changes, such as improving/bugfixing existing libraries,

Re: [Python-Dev] A fast startup patch (was: Python startup time)

On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 6:58 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > What are the obstacles to including "preloaded" objects in regular .pyc > files, so that everyone can take advantage of this without rebuilding the > interpreter? > The system we have developed can create a shared object

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On May 7, 2018, at 11:49, Craig Rodrigues wrote: > > Would it be reasonable to request a 10 year moratorium on making changes to > the core Python language, > and for the next 10 years only focus on things that do not require core > language changes, > such as

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, 07 May 2018 19:19:28 + Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > 10 years feels like a simultaneously long and arbitrary limit. IMO a policy > of "try to avoid major language features for a while" would work better. I would remove "for a while". "Try to avoid major language features"

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

10 years feels like a simultaneously long and arbitrary limit. IMO a policy of "try to avoid major language features for a while" would work better. On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 2:11 PM Craig Rodrigues wrote: > > > On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 7:35 PM Nick Coghlan

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 7:35 PM Nick Coghlan wrote: > > I'm inclined to agree that a Python 3.8 PEP in the spirit of the PEP 3003 > language moratorium could be a very good idea. Between matrix > multiplication, enhanced tuple unpacking, native coroutines, f-strings, and >

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On 5/7/2018 7:59 AM, Eric Snow wrote: On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: I'm inclined to agree that a Python 3.8 PEP in the spirit of the PEP 3003 language moratorium could be a very good idea. Note that the PEP specifically applies to "syntax, semantics,

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

> On May 7, 2018, at 9:57 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > > On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 09:55 Ivan Levkivskyi > wrote: > On 7 May 2018 at 17:32, Brett Cannon > wrote: > On Mon, 7 May

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 09:55 Ivan Levkivskyi wrote: > On 7 May 2018 at 17:32, Brett Cannon wrote: > >> On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 08:18 João Santos wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to see this go even further and have a tick-tock

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On 7 May 2018 at 17:32, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 08:18 João Santos wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I would like to see this go even further and have a tick-tock approach to >> python versions, i.e. adopt new syntax and other large changes on one

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 08:18 João Santos wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to see this go even further and have a tick-tock approach to > python versions, i.e. adopt new syntax and other large changes on one > version (for example odd versions) and polish everything up in the next >

Re: [Python-Dev] Python startup time

On 2018-05-03, Lukasz Langa wrote: > > On May 2, 2018, at 8:57 PM, INADA Naoki wrote: > > * Add lazy compiling API or flag in `re` module. The pattern is compiled > > when first used. > > How about go the other way and allow compiling at Python > *compile*-time? That

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

Hi, I would like to see this go even further and have a tick-tock approach to python versions, i.e. adopt new syntax and other large changes on one version (for example odd versions) and polish everything up in the next (even versions). Best regards, João Santos On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 11:19 Ivan

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > I'm inclined to agree that a Python 3.8 PEP in the spirit of the PEP 3003 > language moratorium could be a very good idea. Note that the PEP specifically applies to "syntax, semantics, and built-ins". Here's the full

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

07.05.18 16:50, Joao S. O. Bueno пише: May it is important to note that Python 3.7 already has very little syntactic changes. Actually, there are no new syntac changes with PEP 563 - (Postponed Evaluation of Annotations) being maybe the only change to existing behavior, and PEP 562 as new

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

May it is important to note that Python 3.7 already has very little syntactic changes. Actually, there are no new syntac changes with PEP 563 - (Postponed Evaluation of Annotations) being maybe the only change to existing behavior, and PEP 562 as new "non-library-dependent" feature, even though

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

07.05.18 14:19, Nick Coghlan пише: And as the current python-ideas discussion about accessing paths relative to __file__ shows, I can't believe this is discussed seriously. Forgot about the Python 2 legacy, just use importlib. ___ Python-Dev

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On 7 May 2018 at 19:17, Ivan Levkivskyi wrote: > These are all god points. I think it will be a good idea to take a little > pause with syntactic additions and other "cognitively loaded" changes. On > the other hand, I think it is fine to work on performance improvements >

[Python-Dev] static linking Python

On Fri, 04 May 2018 00:21:54 + Ray Donnelly wrote: > > Now that Python 3.7 is around the corner we have a chance to re-evaluate > this decision. We have received no binary compat. bugs whatsoever due to > this change (we got a few bugs where people used python-config

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On 7 May 2018 at 03:25, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 7 May 2018 at 11:30, Dan Stromberg wrote: > >> I'd very much like a live in a world where Jython and IronPython and >> MicroPython and Cython and Pyjamas can all catch up and implement >> Python 3.7, 3.8,

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, 7 May 2018 12:25:46 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 7 May 2018 at 11:30, Dan Stromberg wrote: > > > I'd very much like a live in a world where Jython and IronPython and > > MicroPython and Cython and Pyjamas can all catch up and implement > >