On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Eric Snow wrote:
> Are there other objects in the interpreter state that are exposed in
> sys that would have the same problem?
Rebinding (rather than mutating) any global state in any module is
always dubious due to the potential for direct references to the
prev
On 7/23/2011 5:34 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
Glenn Linderman g.nevcal.com> writes:
I aim to update the launcher downloads Real Soon Now.
Has fixed my problem with not having a local py.ini file, and now is
picking up python=3 from the py.ini coresident to the py.exe. Thanks,
Mark & Vinay.
___
2011/7/24 Eric Snow :
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Benjamin Peterson
> wrote:
>> 2011/7/23 Eric Snow :
>>> The documentation[1] doesn't say, but the implementation of the imp
>>> module makes me wonder if sys.modules was not meant to be replaceable.
>>> No doubt this has to do with its ti
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2011/7/23 Eric Snow :
>> The documentation[1] doesn't say, but the implementation of the imp
>> module makes me wonder if sys.modules was not meant to be replaceable.
>> No doubt this has to do with its tie to the interpreter's modules
2011/7/23 Eric Snow :
> The documentation[1] doesn't say, but the implementation of the imp
> module makes me wonder if sys.modules was not meant to be replaceable.
> No doubt this has to do with its tie to the interpreter's modules
> dict. I ran into this doing "sys.modules = sys.modules.copy()"
The documentation[1] doesn't say, but the implementation of the imp
module makes me wonder if sys.modules was not meant to be replaceable.
No doubt this has to do with its tie to the interpreter's modules
dict. I ran into this doing "sys.modules = sys.modules.copy()" to
protect the actual sys.mod
Some background: I'm working (on and off) on issue 11015 - documenting
the public functions in test.support
Some of the functions in test.support (for example unlink, rmtree)
simply shadow existing & popular stdlib functions, with the aim of
swallowing the exceptions these may throw. This is confu
I put up a tracker issue at http://bugs.python.org/issue12627
There are patches for 2.7 as well as tip, but they only fix the
Makefiles; no changes are done to documentation.
Also, Ned, it appears that Python 2.7 doesn't install the Idle or
PyDoc binaries (grep the 2.7 Makefile to see what I mean
On Jul 23, 2011, at 5:18 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> My point is that on non-trivial benchmarks, the savings are almost zero.
That could be said of any optimization in Python.
Typical Python scripts exercise many features at time,
so any one optimization by itself if almost useless.
Collective
I undrestand your point. Thank you for explanation.
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Le dimanche 24 juillet 2011 à 03:15 +0300, Andrew Svetlov a écrit :
>> You right. Sorry, I missed changes in ceval.c for py3k.
>> Please note, simple test like:
>>
>> from timeit import ti
Le dimanche 24 juillet 2011 à 03:15 +0300, Andrew Svetlov a écrit :
> You right. Sorry, I missed changes in ceval.c for py3k.
> Please note, simple test like:
>
> from timeit import timeit
>
> print('list', timeit("l[0]", "l = [1]"))
> print('tuple', timeit("l[0]", "l = (1,)"))
>
> Has results:
You right. Sorry, I missed changes in ceval.c for py3k.
Please note, simple test like:
from timeit import timeit
print('list', timeit("l[0]", "l = [1]"))
print('tuple', timeit("l[0]", "l = (1,)"))
Has results:
andrew@ocean ~/p/cpython> python2.7 z.py
('list', 0.03479599952697754)
('tuple', 0.04
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:13:07 +1000
Ryan Kelly wrote:
>
> In latest trunk this optimisation seems to have gone away, the code is
> now:
>
> TARGET(BINARY_SUBSCR)
> w = POP();
> v = TOP();
> x = PyObject_GetItem(v, w);
> Py_DECREF(v);
>
On Sun, 2011-07-24 at 01:20 +0300, Andrew Svetlov wrote:
> tuple[int] is 30% slower than list[int].
> Please let me explain the problem.
>
> (1, 2, 3)[1] has compiled as BINARY_SUBSCR operation.
> ceval.c has optimization for list:
>
> case BINARY_SUBSCR:
> w = POP();
>
tuple[int] is 30% slower than list[int].
Please let me explain the problem.
(1, 2, 3)[1] has compiled as BINARY_SUBSCR operation.
ceval.c has optimization for list:
case BINARY_SUBSCR:
w = POP();
v = TOP();
if (PyList_CheckExact(v) && PyInt_CheckExact(w
> Ok, it should be fixed now.
>
Indeed.
Thanks!
cf
___
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
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 16:10:38 +0200
Charles-François Natali wrote:
>
> No traceback.
> Last time I did a push (yesterday), there was a slight difference, the
> lines reporting the failure were prefixed by "buildbot:" (IIRC). And
> indeed, none of my pushes triggers a build on the buildbots (and I'
(See http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-July/112309.html
for the original mail):
"""
$ hg push
pushing to ssh://h...@hg.python.org/cpython
searching for changes
remote: adding changesets
remote: adding manifests
remote: adding file changes
remote: added 1 changesets with 2 changes to
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 11:46:05 +0200
Charles-François Natali wrote:
> > Note that this commit wasn't actually a merge -- you'll have to use the
> > "hg merge" command for that.
>
> You're right.
> I guess that's what happens when I try to work past my usual bedtime ;-)
>
> By the way, I'm still g
Glenn Linderman g.nevcal.com> writes:
I aim to update the launcher downloads Real Soon Now.
> What (free?) toolset is needed for building the launcher? I don't
> even have a C compiler installed on this computer yet.
>
The tools I use for building the launcher are:
Windows SDK (for t
> Note that this commit wasn't actually a merge -- you'll have to use the
> "hg merge" command for that.
You're right.
I guess that's what happens when I try to work past my usual bedtime ;-)
By the way, I'm still getting errors upon push, and it looks like when
I push a patch, this doesn't trigg
On 23/07/2011 9.55, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 8:34 AM, ezio.melotti
wrote:
Author: ezio.melotti
Date: Sat Jul 23 00:34:53 2011
New Revision: 88867
Log:
#267: remove the remove button from the issue page, move it to the msg/file
page, and add a button to add back removed mes
Am 22.07.2011 23:51, schrieb charles-francois.natali:
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/63de97ae832e
> changeset: 71462:63de97ae832e
> parent: 71459:d3f0f72c31f8
> user:Charles-François Natali
> date:Fri Jul 22 23:52:02 2011 +0200
> summary:
> Merge - Issue #12592: Make P
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 8:34 AM, ezio.melotti
wrote:
> Author: ezio.melotti
> Date: Sat Jul 23 00:34:53 2011
> New Revision: 88867
>
> Log:
> #267: remove the remove button from the issue page, move it to the msg/file
> page, and add a button to add back removed messages/files.
Thank you! (I acc
24 matches
Mail list logo
