Neal Norwitz wrote:
> I just checked in the modification below. I'm not sure if this
> behaviour is on purpose or by accident.
Python 2.4 on Linux:
>>> float(" 0x3.1 ")
3.0625
Python 2.4 on Windows:
>>> float(" 0x3.1 ")
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "", line 1, in ?
ValueError
On 11/21/05, Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 10:29:55PM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> > > I see no incremental way of fixing some of the downsides of hotshot,
> > > like its huge log file size and loading time.
> >
> > I haven't looked into the det
Hi Martin,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 10:29:55PM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> > I see no incremental way of fixing some of the downsides of hotshot,
> > like its huge log file size and loading time.
>
> I haven't looked into the details myself, but it appears that some
> google-summer-of-code c
I just checked in the modification below. I'm not sure if this
behaviour is on purpose or by accident. Do we want to support hex
values in floats?
Do we want to support p, similar to e in floats?
Here are the lines from the test:
+self.assertEqual(float(" 0x3.1 "), 3.0625)
+
Currently test_directories of test_cmd_line fails on the latest Python 2.4.2
from svn branch and from the svn head. The reason it seems is that the test
assumes that the local language of Windows is English and so tries to find
the string " denied" in the returned system error messages of the co
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:36:36 +1300
Tony Meyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --
> AST for Python
> --
>
> As of October 21st, Python's compiler now uses a real Abstract Syntax
> Tree (AST)! This should make experimenting with new syntax much
> easier, as well as allo
Greg Stein points out that because of the way the subversion
conversion was done, by-date revision specifications won't
work. Subversion assumes that time is monotonically increasing
over revions numbers - it does a binary search to find out
the revision that immediately precedes(?) the specified d
Brett> My question is whether anyone is willing to maintain it in the
Brett> stdlib?
My answer is: I'm not sure it matters at this point. There are so many
profiling possibilities, it doesn't seem like we yet know which options are
the best. There is some tacit crowning of "best of bree
On 11/21/05, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't think there's a shortage of Windows boxes among the python-dev
> crowd (I have plenty). Does anyone knows that kind of box you need to
> run purify these days ?
Dunno, but it would probably be fine on a reasonably new box with at
l
Neal Norwitz wrote:
> I think a bigger bang for the buck would be to buy a Windows box with
> Purify. Rational was a real pain to deal with, maybe it's better now
> that IBM bought them. Parasoft (Insure++) was even worse to deal
> with. There would be many other benefits for someone to do more
Neal Norwitz:
> I think a bigger bang for the buck would be to buy a Windows box with
> Purify. Rational was a real pain to deal with, maybe it's better now
> that IBM bought them. Parasoft (Insure++) was even worse to deal
> with.
My experience with the other Windows option, BoundsChecker,
Jim Jewett wrote:
> Jeremy Hylton jeremy at alum.mit.edu
>> Should lsprof be added to the standard distribution?
>> Should hotshot be removed from the standard distribution?
>
>> These two aren't at all related, unless you believe that two is the
>> maximum number of profiles allowed per Pytho
Brett Cannon wrote:
> But this worry, in my mind, is alleviated since I believe both Michael
> and Armin are willing to maintain the code. With them both willing to
> make sure it stays working (which is a pretty damn good commitment
> since we have two core developers willing to keep this going a
Jeremy Hylton jeremy at alum.mit.edu
> Should lsprof be added to the standard distribution?
> Should hotshot be removed from the standard distribution?
> These two aren't at all related, unless you believe that two is the
> maximum number of profiles allowed per Python distribution.
One is a
Armin Rigo wrote:
> I see no incremental way of fixing some of the downsides of hotshot,
> like its huge log file size and loading time.
I haven't looked into the details myself, but it appears that some
google-summer-of-code contributor has found some way of fixing it.
> I doubt people often fin
Hi Floris,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 04:45:03PM +, Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
> Afaik I did test recursive calls etc.
It seems to show up in any test case I try, e.g.
import hprofile
def wait(m):
if m > 0:
wait(m-1)
def f(n):
wait(n)
if n > 1:
Ben Decker wrote:
> I think the port has beed supported for three years now. I am not
> sure what kind of commitment you are looking for, but the patch and
> software are supplied under the same terms of liability and warranty
> as anything else under the GPL.
That (licensed under GPL) would be an
Hi Floris,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 04:41:04PM +, Floris Bruynooghe wrote:
> > Now Brett's
> > student, Floris, extended hotshot to allow custom timers. This is
> > essential, because it enables testing. The timing parts of hotshot were
> > not tested previously.
>
> Don't be too enthousiast
On 11/21/05, Jeremy Hylton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's another attempt to disentagle some issues:
> - Should lsprof be added to the standard distribution?
> - Should hotshot be removed from the standard distribution?
>
> These two aren't at all related, unless you believe that two is the
>
On 11/21/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Jeremy> Here's another attempt to disentagle some issues:
> Jeremy> - Should lsprof be added to the standard distribution?
> Jeremy> - Should hotshot be removed from the standard distribution?
>
> Adding another log to the fi
Jeremy> Here's another attempt to disentagle some issues:
Jeremy> - Should lsprof be added to the standard distribution?
Jeremy> - Should hotshot be removed from the standard distribution?
Adding another log to the fire, what about statprof, a sampling profiler,
which Neil Schemenauer
Here's another attempt to disentagle some issues:
- Should lsprof be added to the standard distribution?
- Should hotshot be removed from the standard distribution?
These two aren't at all related, unless you believe that two is the
maximum number of profiles allowed per Python distribution.
I've
On 11/21/05, Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
>
> On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 08:12:53AM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> > If bugs are in the heavily-used parts of the library, like regular
> > expressions, it doesn't matter much if the original author goes
> > away for some period
On 11/21/05, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> sounds like the PSF should buy you some more RAM.
I think I still have some allocation from the PSF. Wanna have a party. ;-)
Seriously, I don't know that more RAM would help too much. I didn't
notice much swapping, but maybe if I had run
Hi Barry,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 11:40:37AM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Hi Armin. Actually it was SF #900092 that I was referring to.
Ah, we're talking about different things then. The patch in SF #900092
is not related to hotshot, it's just ceval.c not producing enough events
to allow a prec
On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 16:09 +0100, Armin Rigo wrote:
> It might be me, but I find it a bit odd that you didn't do anything with
> this fix.
Hi Armin. Actually it was SF #900092 that I was referring to. We fixed
this bug and those patches were applied to CVS (pre-svn conversion) for
both 2.4.2
Hi Barry,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 09:25:05AM -0500, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> hotshot used to produce incorrect data because it couldn't track exits
> from functions due to exception propagation. We fixed that a while back
It might be me, but I find it a bit odd that you didn't do anything with
this
Neal Norwitz wrote:
> The big benefit of running with pymalloc is that it only takes about
> 1.25 to 1.50 hours to run on my box. When running without pymalloc, I
> estimate it takes about 5 times longer. Plus it requires a lot of
> extra work since I need to run the tests in batches. I only ha
On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 12:14 +0100, Armin Rigo wrote:
> Still, people generally agree that profile.py, while taking a longer
> time overall, gives more meaningful results than hotshot. Now Brett's
> student, Floris, extended hotshot to allow custom timers. This is
> essential, because it enables
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 06:08:45PM +1100, Ben Decker wrote:
> I think the port has beed supported for three years now. I am not sure what
> kind of commitment you are looking for, but the patch and software are
> supplied under the same terms of liability and warranty as anything else
> under the G
Hi Martin,
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 08:12:53AM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> If bugs are in the heavily-used parts of the library, like regular
> expressions, it doesn't matter much if the original author goes
> away for some period of time - other contributors will fix the bugs
> that they car
Hi Tim,
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 08:55:49PM -0500, Tim Peters wrote:
> We should note that hotshot didn't intend to reduce total time
> overhead. What it's aiming at here is to be less disruptive (than
> profile.py) to the code being profiled _while_ that code is running.
> hotshot tries to stic
Hi Brett, hi Floris,
On Sat, Nov 19, 2005 at 04:12:28PM -0800, Brett Cannon wrote:
> Just for everyone's FYI while we are talking about profilers, Floris
> Bruynooghe (who I am cc'ing on this so he can contribute to the
> conversation), for Google's Summer of Code, wrote a replacement for
> 'prof
33 matches
Mail list logo
