Terry Reedy wrote:
I suspect your original query got lost in the shuffle. If you do not
get an answer this time, file an issue on the tracker bugs.python.org
but do not select whether it is a behavior or doc issue. At least, it
will stay open until resolved.
Filing a tracker issue is
Hi,
I was looking around possibilities of bytecode optimizations in cpython and
was looking at some older bugs. One of them being
issue#2499http://bugs.python.org/issue2499;
the following line
kind of confuses me and wasnt sure what exactly Raymond(et al) is planning,
as i presume
that bytecode
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:53 AM, Venkatraman S venka...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Hi ...
If there are some optimizations that can be done in the bytecodes, then
'where' would be
the suggested place to incorporate the same;
The way I modify function's bytecode now (... but I am open to further
[Venkatraman S]
the following line
kind of confuses me and wasnt sure what exactly Raymond(et al) is planning,
I think the AST optimization work is being pursued by tlee.
See his current results on the branch: tlee-ast-optimize/
I don't know if this work has stalled but it was off to a good
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 at 20:31, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 6:38 PM, rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2009 at 21:25, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com writes:
I *think* the 2.x system had an internal buffer that was used by the
file
Hello,
rdmurray at bitdance.com writes:
Since the 'pipe' comment is an XXX, it is not clear that my use case
is covered. However, the actual implementation of readinto seems to
only call 'read' once, so as long as the 'read' of the subclass returns
whatever bytes are available, then it
[Aside to Guido: Oops, I think I accidentally sent you a contentless
reply. Sorry!]
As a suggestion, I think this is relevant to everybody who might be
writing a PEP, so I'm cross-posting to Python-Dev. Probably no
discussion is needed, but Reply-To is set to Python-Ideas.
On Python-Ideas,
As we prepare to merge the io-c branch, the question has come up [1]
about the original Python implementation. Should it just be deleted in
favor C version? The wish to maintain the two implementations together
has been raised on the basis that Python is easier to experiment on
and read (for other
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 at 21:41, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
As we prepare to merge the io-c branch, the question has come up [1]
about the original Python implementation. Should it just be deleted in
favor C version? The wish to maintain the two implementations together
has been raised on the basis
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 19:41, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.orgwrote:
As we prepare to merge the io-c branch, the question has come up [1]
about the original Python implementation. Should it just be deleted in
favor C version? The wish to maintain the two implementations together
has
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull
turnb...@sk.tsukuba.ac.jp wrote:
On Python-Ideas, Guido van Rossum writes:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
Fifth draft of the PEP. Re-worded a few things slightly
to hopefully make the proposal a bit clearer up
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 19:41, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org
wrote:
As we prepare to merge the io-c branch, the question has come up [1]
about the original Python implementation. Should it just be deleted in
favor C
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 19:41, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org
wrote:
As we prepare to merge the io-c branch, the question has come up [1]
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 19:41, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org
wrote:
As we prepare to merge the io-c branch, the question has come up [1]
about the original Python implementation. Should it
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 21:35, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 19:41, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org
wrote:
As we prepare to merge the io-c branch, the
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 12:35 AM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
Currently, if I want to verify that (say) cFoo and Foo do the same thing, or
compare their speed, it's easy because I can import the modules separately.
Given the 3.0 approach, how would one access the Python versions
16 matches
Mail list logo
