Chris Withers wrote:
Sverker Nilsson wrote:
The __repr__ I use don't have the enclosing <>, granted, maybe I missed
this or it wasn't in the docs in 2005 or I didn't think it was important
(still don't) but was that really what the complain was about?
No, it was about the fact that when I do
Sverker Nilsson wrote:
If you just use heap(), and only want total memory not relative to a
reference point, you can just use hpy() directly. So rather than:
CASE 1:
h=hpy()
h.heap().dump(...)
#other code, the data internal to h is still around
h.heap().dump(...)
you'd do:
CASE 2:
hpy().heap
On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 13:47 +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
> Sverker Nilsson wrote:
> > As the enclosing class or frame is deallocated, so is its attribute h
> > itself.
>
> Right, but as long as the h hangs around, it hangs on to all the memory
> it's used to build its stats, right? This caused me
Sverker Nilsson wrote:
But I don't think I would want to risk breaking someone's code just for
this when we could just add a new method.
I don't think anyone will be relying on StopIteration being raised.
If you're worried, do the next release as a 0.10.0 release and explain
the backwards inco
On Mon, 2009-09-07 at 16:53 +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
> Sverker Nilsson wrote:
> > I hope the new loadall method as I wrote about before will resolve this.
> >
> > def loadall(self,f):
> > ''' Generates all objects from an open file f or a file named f'''
> > if isinstance(f,basestring):
Sverker Nilsson wrote:
I hope the new loadall method as I wrote about before will resolve this.
def loadall(self,f):
''' Generates all objects from an open file f or a file named f'''
if isinstance(f,basestring):
f=open(f)
while True:
yield self.load(f)
It would be
On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 15:25 +0200, Sverker Nilsson wrote:
>
> However, I am aware of the extra initial overhead to do h=hpy(). I
> discussed this in my thesis. "Section 4.7.8 Why not importing Use
> directly?" page 36,
>
> http://guppy-pe.sourceforge.net/heapy-thesis.pdf
Actually it is describ
On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 10:05 +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
> Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> > In the first case, you would write:
> >sets.extend(h.load(f))
>
> yes, what I had was:
>
> for s in iter(h.load(f)): sets.append(s)
>
> ...which I mistakenly thought was working, but in in fact boils down
