Here is the latest draft of the PEP. I have closed the issue of file name
formatting thanks to the informal poll results being very clear on the
preferred format and also closed the idea of embedding the optimization
level in the bytecode file metadata (that can be another PEP if someone
cares to
Hi Brett,
On 6 March 2015 at 19:11, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
I disagree with your premise that .pyo files don't have a noticeable effect
on performance. If you don't use asserts a lot then there is no effect, but
if you use them heavily or have them perform expensive calculations
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:49 PM Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015, at 15:11, Brett Cannon wrote:
OK, but that doesn't influence the PEP's goal of dropping .pyo files.
Correct.
Are you suggesting that the tag be changed to be less specific to
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 5:29 PM Armin Rigo ar...@tunes.org wrote:
Hi Brett,
On 6 March 2015 at 19:11, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
I disagree with your premise that .pyo files don't have a noticeable
effect
on performance. If you don't use asserts a lot then there is no effect,
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 05:34:10PM +, Brett Cannon wrote:
I have a poll going on G+ to see what people think of the various proposed
file name formats at
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+BrettCannon/posts/fZynLNwHWGm . Feel free to
vote if you have an opinion.
G+ hates my browser and won't
On Mar 07, 2015, at 12:30 PM, Scott Dial wrote:
As a packager, this PEP is a bit silent on it's expectations about what
will happen with (for instance) Debian and Fedora packages for Python.
My familiarity is with Fedora, and on that platform, we ship .pyc and
.pyo files (using -O for the .pyo).
For the record here: +1 on the PEP from me (the comments I made on
import-sig have already incorporated into this version of the PEP)
On 8 March 2015 at 08:03, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 12:39 PM Scott Dial scott+python-...@scottdial.com
wrote:
On 2015-03-06
On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 9:29 AM Ron Adam ron3...@gmail.com wrote:
On 03/07/2015 04:58 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 08:00:20PM -0500, Ron Adam wrote:
Have you considered doing this by having different magic numbers in the
.pyc file for standard, -O, and -O0 compiled
On 2015-03-06 11:34 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
This PEP proposes eliminating the concept of PYO files from Python.
To continue the support of the separation of bytecode files based on
their optimization level, this PEP proposes extending the PYC file
name to include the optimization level in
On 03/07/2015 04:58 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 08:00:20PM -0500, Ron Adam wrote:
Have you considered doing this by having different magic numbers in the
.pyc file for standard, -O, and -O0 compiled bytecode files? Python
already checks that number and recompiles the
On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 08:00:20PM -0500, Ron Adam wrote:
Have you considered doing this by having different magic numbers in the
.pyc file for standard, -O, and -O0 compiled bytecode files? Python
already checks that number and recompiles the files if it's not what it's
expected to be.
On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 12:39 PM Scott Dial scott+python-...@scottdial.com
wrote:
On 2015-03-06 11:34 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
This PEP proposes eliminating the concept of PYO files from Python.
To continue the support of the separation of bytecode files based on
their optimization level,
On Sat, 7 Mar 2015 09:34:20 +1100
Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 09:37:05PM +0100, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 18:11:19 +
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
And the dropping of docstrings does have an impact on
memory usage when
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 5:47 PM Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 7 Mar 2015 09:34:20 +1100
Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 09:37:05PM +0100, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 18:11:19 +
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015, at 15:11, Brett Cannon wrote:
OK, but that doesn't influence the PEP's goal of dropping .pyo files.
Correct.
Are you suggesting that the tag be changed to be less specific to
optimizations and more free-form? Like
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 3:37 PM Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 18:11:19 +
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
And the dropping of docstrings does have an impact on
memory usage when you use Python at scale.
What kind of scale are you talking about? Do
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015, at 15:13, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org
wrote:
I think it would be preferable deprecate -O and -OO and replace them
with flags like --no-docstrings or --no-asserts. Ideally, optimization
levels shouldn't
On 03/06/2015 11:34 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
There are currently two open issues, although one is purely a bikeshed
topic on formatting of file names so I don't really consider it open for
change from what is proposed in the PEP without Guido saying he hates my
preference or someone having a
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:49 PM Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015, at 15:11, Brett Cannon wrote:
OK, but that doesn't influence the PEP's goal of dropping .pyo files.
Correct.
Are you suggesting that the tag be changed to be less specific to
Over on the import-sig I proposed eliminating the concept of .pyo files
since they only signify that *some* optimization took place, not
*what* optimizations
took place. Everyone on the SIG was positive with the idea so I wrote a
PEP, got positive feedback from the SIG again, and so now I present
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Brett Cannon bcan...@gmail.com wrote:
Not specifying the optimization level when it is at 0
-
It has been suggested that for the common case of when the
optimizations are at level 0 that the entire part of the
On 06/03/15 16:34, Brett Cannon wrote:
Over on the import-sig I proposed eliminating the concept of .pyo files
since they only signify that /some/ optimization took place, not
/what/ optimizations took place. Everyone on the SIG was positive with
the idea so I wrote a PEP, got positive feedback
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:03 PM Mark Shannon m...@hotpy.org wrote:
On 06/03/15 16:34, Brett Cannon wrote:
Over on the import-sig I proposed eliminating the concept of .pyo files
since they only signify that /some/ optimization took place, not
/what/ optimizations took place. Everyone on
Thanks! All suggestions applied to my local copy.
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:55 PM Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
On 03/06/2015 08:34 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
Over on the import-sig I proposed eliminating the concept of .pyo files
since they only signify that /some/ optimization
took
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:27 PM Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:03 PM Mark Shannon m...@hotpy.org wrote:
On 06/03/15 16:34, Brett Cannon wrote:
Over on the import-sig I proposed
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:03 PM Mark Shannon m...@hotpy.org wrote:
On 06/03/15 16:34, Brett Cannon wrote:
Over on the import-sig I proposed eliminating the concept of .pyo files
since they only signify that /some/
On 03/06/2015 08:34 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
Over on the import-sig I proposed eliminating the concept of .pyo files since
they only signify that /some/ optimization
took place, not /what/ optimizations took place. Everyone on the SIG was
positive with the idea so I wrote a PEP, got
positive
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015, at 13:34, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:27 PM Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:03 PM Mark Shannon m...@hotpy.org wrote:
On 06/03/15
On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org wrote:
I think it would be preferable deprecate -O and -OO and replace them
with flags like --no-docstrings or --no-asserts. Ideally, optimization
levels shouldn't change program semantics.
Plenty of C compilers have
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:09 PM Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015, at 13:34, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:27 PM Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On
On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 18:11:19 +
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
And the dropping of docstrings does have an impact on
memory usage when you use Python at scale.
What kind of scale are you talking about? Do you have any numbers
about such impact?
You're also assuming that we will never
31 matches
Mail list logo
