> > On 09/12/2019 2:15 pm, Chris Angelico wrote:
> You: "We should limit things. Stuff will be faster."
> Others: "Really? Because bit masking is work. It'll be slower."
> You: "Maybe we limit it somewhere else, whatever. It'll be faster."
> Others: "Will it? How much faster?"
> You: "It'll be faster."

Mark, possibly you want to re-frame the PEP to be more like "this is
good for correctness and enabling robust reasoning about the
interpreter, which has a variety of benefits (and possibly speed will
be one of them eventually)"? My impression is that you see speedups as
a secondary motivation, while other people are getting the impression
that speedups are the entire motivation, so one way or the other the
text is confusing people.

In particular, right now the most detailed example is the compacted
object header bit, which makes it a magnet for critique. Also, I don't
understand how this idea would work at all :-). So I'd either remove
it or else make it more detailed, one or the other.

-n

-- 
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/5NQWKURB45J5NIZWD5R7GDTEDAGY7U7S/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Reply via email to