Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: zope.component/trunk/ Merge the 'tseaver-wo_zope_deferredimport' branch:
Hi, On Tue, 2009-03-10 at 04:18 +0300, Dan Korostelev wrote: 2009/3/5 Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com: Chris Withers wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: I think we can only make the correct determination if we get an idea of the performance implications. If it turns out the C code brings significant speedups in real-world applications, we should create a zope.hookable with a Python + C implementation. Even if it does bring significant speedups, why does it need to be a seperate package? It doesn't, but it's already a package that could be easily turned into something with proper documentation (it's mostly there, just hidden), and one of the goals was to reduce C dependencies in zope.component, not add C code to it. Let's decide that and make a release of zope.component so we could move forward on adapting other packages to recent removal of BBB interfaces. Here's three variants: * Move pure python implementation to zope.hookable as a fallback. * Move C implementation to zope.component and drop zope.hookable dependency at all. * Just drop zope.hookable dependency, providing only pure python version of hookable. I'm -1 on version 3. Whether to keep it as a separate module IMHO depends on the usefulness of the C implementation. If we drop it then we can IMHO live without the standalone package. If we keep two implementations then I'd move both of them to a separate package. Christian -- Christian Theune · c...@gocept.com gocept gmbh co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 7 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: zope.component/trunk/ Merge the 'tseaver-wo_zope_deferredimport' branch:
2009/3/5 Martijn Faassen faas...@startifact.com: Chris Withers wrote: Martijn Faassen wrote: I think we can only make the correct determination if we get an idea of the performance implications. If it turns out the C code brings significant speedups in real-world applications, we should create a zope.hookable with a Python + C implementation. Even if it does bring significant speedups, why does it need to be a seperate package? It doesn't, but it's already a package that could be easily turned into something with proper documentation (it's mostly there, just hidden), and one of the goals was to reduce C dependencies in zope.component, not add C code to it. Let's decide that and make a release of zope.component so we could move forward on adapting other packages to recent removal of BBB interfaces. Here's three variants: * Move pure python implementation to zope.hookable as a fallback. * Move C implementation to zope.component and drop zope.hookable dependency at all. * Just drop zope.hookable dependency, providing only pure python version of hookable. The second (or even third, if there's no significant slowdown) variant seems fine to me personally, because, as Tres noted, there's probably no consumers for zope.hookable beyond zope.component, so we can safely merge the packages. Jim, Philipp, Marius, can you please give us rights on PYPI for zope.component. My account is nadako there, so you can give it to me and I'll add other people. -- WBR, Dan Korostelev ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: zope.component/trunk/ Merge the 'tseaver-wo_zope_deferredimport' branch:
Martijn Faassen wrote: I think we can only make the correct determination if we get an idea of the performance implications. If it turns out the C code brings significant speedups in real-world applications, we should create a zope.hookable with a Python + C implementation. Even if it does bring significant speedups, why does it need to be a seperate package? Chris -- Simplistix - Content Management, Zope Python Consulting - http://www.simplistix.co.uk ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
Re: [Zope-dev] SVN: zope.component/trunk/ Merge the 'tseaver-wo_zope_deferredimport' branch:
Tres Seaver wrote: [snip] It probably could be (in fact, I prototyped it there first). However, it turns out that zope.hookable has effectively *no* clients beyond zope.component, which meant that I could lose the 'install_requires' dependency altogether by moving the pure-Python bits to zope.component. Thoughts, My thought is that if we treat zope.hookable as a library that stands on its own, which I believe is a principle we should follow, we should do what Dan suggests and move it into zope.hookable. But your discovery that zope.hookable isn't used anywhere else is an interesting one, so we need to weigh that against the opportunity to get rid of a separate library people need to understand. I think we can only make the correct determination if we get an idea of the performance implications. If it turns out the C code brings significant speedups in real-world applications, we should create a zope.hookable with a Python + C implementation. If not, we should get rid of zope.hookable altogether. Regards, Martijn ___ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
