> > 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/