On 02.06.2015 21:07, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
Hi
There was a PSF-sponsored effort to improve the situation with the
https://bitbucket.org/pypy/codespeed2/src being written (thank you
PSF). It's not better enough than codespeed that I would like, but
gives some opportunities.
That said,
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:38 AM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
On 02.06.2015 21:07, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
Hi
There was a PSF-sponsored effort to improve the situation with the
https://bitbucket.org/pypy/codespeed2/src being written (thank you
PSF). It's not better enough than
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 12:04:10 +0200, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:38 AM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
On 02.06.2015 21:07, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
Hi
There was a PSF-sponsored effort to improve the situation with the
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 3:49 PM, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 12:04:10 +0200, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:38 AM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
On 02.06.2015 21:07, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
Hi
There was
If someone were to volunteer to set up and run speed.python.org, I think
we could add some additional focus on performance regressions. Right now,
we don't have any way of reliably and reproducibly testing Python
performance.
I'm very interested in speed.python.org and feel regret that the
Hi
There was a PSF-sponsored effort to improve the situation with the
https://bitbucket.org/pypy/codespeed2/src being written (thank you
PSF). It's not better enough than codespeed that I would like, but
gives some opportunities.
That said, we have a benchmark machine for benchmarking cpython
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 3:08 PM Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
There was a PSF-sponsored effort to improve the situation with the
https://bitbucket.org/pypy/codespeed2/src being written (thank you
PSF). It's not better enough than codespeed that I would like, but
gives some
On 01.06.2015 12:44, Armin Rigo wrote:
Hi Larry,
On 31 May 2015 at 01:20, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
p.s. Supporting this patch also helps cut into PyPy's reported performance
lead--that is, if they ever upgrade speed.pypy.org from comparing against
Python *2.7.2*.
Right,
Hello,
On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:14:27 +0200
M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
[]
The 7.0x faster number on speed.pypy.org would be significantly
*higher* if we upgraded the baseline to 2.7.10 now.
If someone were to volunteer to set up and run speed.python.org,
I think we could add
Hi Larry,
On 31 May 2015 at 01:20, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
p.s. Supporting this patch also helps cut into PyPy's reported performance
lead--that is, if they ever upgrade speed.pypy.org from comparing against
Python *2.7.2*.
Right, we should do this upgrade when 2.7.11 is out.
2015-05-31 0:26 GMT+02:00 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com:
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
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 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
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
On 2015-05-29 23:14, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com
mailto:ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com
mailto:victor.stin...@gmail.com wrote:
Why not continue to
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
environment. Every improvement means more speed and less power
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com
wrote:
Why not continue to enhance Python 3 instead of wasting our time with
On 30 May 2015 07:14, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com
wrote:
Why not continue to enhance Python 3 instead of wasting our time with
Python 2?
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 discussion we should be having on it's own merits. It was really
out of
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Ian Cordasco graffatcolmin...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, Victor Stinner
On May 29, 2015, at 04:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
There are a fair number of people on this thread whose employer pays them to
work on Python.
My guess is that as Python 2.7 gets longer in the tooth, and it becomes harder
to motivate volunteers to shepherd contributed patches into Python 2,
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Ian Cordasco graffatcolmin...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan
On 30 May 2015 09:21, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On May 29, 2015, at 04:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
There are a fair number of people on this thread whose employer pays
them to
work on Python.
My guess is that as Python 2.7 gets longer in the tooth, and it becomes
harder
to
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 thousands of machines in the
cloud.
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com
wrote:
Why not continue to enhance Python 3 instead of wasting our time with
Python 2? We have limited resources in term of developers to maintain
46 matches
Mail list logo
