Hello,
2008/8/23 Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
when I'm trying to build extensions under Python 2.6 on Windows XP, the
build process terminates with single line that says:
error: None
which is about as useless as an error message can be. Googling for this
brings up a few hits which
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc wrote:
when I'm trying to build extensions under Python 2.6 on Windows XP, the
build process terminates with single line that says:
error: None
which is about as useless as an error message can be. Googling for this
brings up a few hits which all seem to involve
Fredrik Lundh schrieb:
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc wrote:
when I'm trying to build extensions under Python 2.6 on Windows XP, the
build process terminates with single line that says:
error: None
which is about as useless as an error message can be. Googling for this
brings up a few hits
Neal Lib/gzip.py:114: Using property (filename) in classic class GzipFile
Neal may not work
Seems shallow. Just inherit from object.
Neal Lib/sched.py:122: Using property (queue) in classic class scheduler
Neal may not work
Ditto.
Neal Lib/tempfile.py:535: Using
Neal Norwitz nnorwitz at gmail.com writes:
Can someone (else) compare performance of 2.5, 2.6, and 3.0?
Tests done on a 32-bit Linux installation on an Athlon 3600+ X2. Compiled with
gcc in UCS2 mode.
pystone
---
- 2.5: 43859.6 pystones/second
- 2.6: 42016.8 pystones/second
- 3.0: 38759.7
me Seems shallow. Just inherit from object.
...
me I'm testing out the inherit-from-object fixes now.
They all passed. Here's the patch:
http://bugs.python.org/issue3658
In addition, I get these two test failures on trunk:
% ./python.exe ../Lib/test/regrtest.py
Recently I have opened a blog on Artima and I am publishing a
few Python-related essays I had in store. In particular a trilogy
of papers about super. From the foreword:
In 2004 I decided to write a comprehensive paper documenting
``super`` pitfalls and traps, with the goal of publishing it on
Thomas Heller wrote:
I'm beginning to suspect that I have a botched VS install on this
machine, though. I'll investigate.
Do you get a traceback when you set the DISTUTILS_DEBUG environment
variable?
Indeed I do:
...
File c:\python26\lib\distutils\msvc9compiler.py, line 436, in
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
PS. Can any resident Microsoft compiler expert perhaps summarize the
differences between the Express Edition and the real editions wrt.
generated code? Are there any differences at all?
The express edition does neither support PGO (profile guided
optimization) nor cross
Hi Michele,
Do you have a URL for this blog?
Matt
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Had a brief offline discussion with Michele - forwarding.
-- Forwarded message --
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 12:13 AM
On Aug 24, 3:43 pm, Matt Giuca [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Michele,
Do you have a URL for this blog?
Sorry, here it
Thanks Antoine!
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 5:58 AM, Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Neal Norwitz nnorwitz at gmail.com writes:
Can someone (else) compare performance of 2.5, 2.6, and 3.0?
Tests done on a 32-bit Linux installation on an Athlon 3600+ X2. Compiled with
gcc in UCS2 mode.
Hi,
So 3.0 is about 10% slower than 2.x. Given all the changes, that
doesn't seem too bad.
Yes, I think it's rather good.
- 2.5: 770.54 ms per iteration
- 2.6: 572.84 ms per iteration
- 3.0: 566.69 ms per iteration
I'm a little concerned about why the big change here. Though if
is the suggestion to *replace* the 4.1.0 database with a 5.1.0
database, or to add yet another database in that module?
I would replace it.
(how's the 3.2/4.1 dual support implemented?
The compiler needs data files for all supported versions, with
old_versions listing the, well, old
That's up to us. I don't know what the reason was for keeping the
3.2.0 database around -- does anyone here recall ever using it? For
what?
It's needed for IDNA. The IDNA RFC requires that Unicode 3.2 is used
for performing IDNA (in particular, for determining what a valid domain
name is).
I can tinker a little with this over the weekend, unless Martin tells
me not to ;-)
Go ahead; I can't work on this at the moment, anyway. I would also be
confident that a mere replacement of 4.1 with 5.1 should be easy, and
I see no reason to keep the 4.1 version.
Perhaps makeunicodedata
Martin v. Löwis martin at v.loewis.de writes:
It's needed for IDNA. The IDNA RFC requires that Unicode 3.2 is used
for performing IDNA (in particular, for determining what a valid domain
name is).
Speaking of which, Martin, did you take a look at
http://bugs.python.org/issue3232 ?
I suppose
Antoine Pitrou schrieb:
Hi,
pystone
---
- 2.5: 43859.6 pystones/second
- 2.6: 42016.8 pystones/second
- 3.0: 38759.7 pystones/second
So 3.0 is about 10% slower than 2.x. Given all the changes, that
doesn't seem too bad.
Yes, I think it's rather good.
Well, pystone really doesn't
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 05:04:16 am Antoine Pitrou wrote:
CompareFloatsIntegers: 274ms 274ms 0.30us
0.630ms
Much slower, but probably due to switch from int - long. There
could be potential for optimizing this case.
Well honestly you don't often compare different
Many buildbots are running bsddb 4.7, particularly the debian/ubuntu
ones (4.7.25 which seems to be the latest). Some of them are
crashing, others are not. The max version we support in both 2.6 and
3.0 is 4.7. Should we allow this version or should we use a lower
maximum that is more likely to
[CCing Clint]
4.7.25 generally looks fine, except for sparc (afaics); I asked the Debian bsddb
maintainer to have a look at the sparc problems. At least on sparc, there's no
difference between 4.6 and 4.7. I usually try to run the buildbots with the
recent software in the distribution, as this is
21 matches
Mail list logo
