Benjamin Peterson wrote:
Then, you might garner some more reviews by putting your patch up on
Rietveld; it makes reviewing much painful.
"... much _less_ painful", I hope!
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailm
Dear Python developer,
within the scope of my diploma thesis at the University of Paderborn, Germany,
with the title "Study about communication and collaboration in software
development in teams" I am conducting a survey of members of software
development teams.
I would be very grateful if yo
Hi All,
I'd like to work on this issue:
http://bugs.python.org/issue2576
Specifically, in my case, while IE can download a 150Mb file from a
local server in about 3 seconds, httplib takes over 20 minutes!
However, I'm kinda stumped on where to start with debugging the
difference. I've tried
Chris Withers simplistix.co.uk> writes:
>
> However, I'm kinda stumped on where to start with debugging the
> difference. I've tried upping the buffer size as suggested in the issue,
> but it's had no effect...
Then perhaps it's not the same bug.
Please take a look at CPU utilization during th
[moving this from the bug tracker]
Alexandre Vassalotti wrote:
> Alexandre Vassalotti added the comment:
>
> Not a bug.
>
> The list comprehension in your chunker:
>
> while True:
> target.send([ (yield) for i in range(chunk_size) ])
>
> is equivalent to the following generator in
Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>
> If python-dev was more interested, we would have a policy for this. *cough*
>
PEP 5 isn't enough? (I'll grant that PEP could probably do with
mentioning the use of warnings.warn(DeprecationWarning) explicitly, but
the policy itself seems fine)
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nic
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>>
>> If python-dev was more interested, we would have a policy for this. *cough*
>>
>
> PEP 5 isn't enough? (I'll grant that PEP could probably do with
> mentioning the use of warnings.warn(DeprecationWarning) explicitly, but
> the policy itself se
Stefan Behnel wrote:
> This is also an important issue for other Python implementations. Cython
> simply transforms comprehensions into the equivalent for-loop, so when we
> implement PEP 342 in Cython, we will have to find a way to emulate
> CPython's behaviour here (unless we decide to stick with
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Chris Withers simplistix.co.uk> writes:
However, I'm kinda stumped on where to start with debugging the
difference. I've tried upping the buffer size as suggested in the issue,
but it's had no effect...
Then perhaps it's not the same bug.
Please take a look at CPU utili
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> This is also an important issue for other Python implementations. Cython
>> simply transforms comprehensions into the equivalent for-loop, so when we
>> implement PEP 342 in Cython, we will have to find a way to emulate
>> CPython's behaviour here (unle
Try instrumenting the actual calls to the lowest-level socket methods
(recv() and send()) and log for each one the arguments, return time,
and how long it took. You might see a pattern. Is this on Windows?
It's embarrassing, we've had problems with socket speed on Windows
since 1999 and they're sti
s/return time/return size/
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 8:07 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Try instrumenting the actual calls to the lowest-level socket methods
> (recv() and send()) and log for each one the arguments, return time,
> and how long it took. You might see a pattern. Is this on Windows?
>
Stefan Behnel behnel.de> writes:
>
> IMHO, that's pretty far from obvious when you look at the code.
A "yield" wrapped in a list comprehension looks far from obvious IMO anyway,
whether in 2.x or 3.x. It's this kind of "smart" writing tricks people find that
only makes code more difficult to rea
Guido van Rossum wrote:
Try instrumenting the actual calls to the lowest-level socket methods
(recv() and send()) and log for each one the arguments, return time,
and how long it took.
Can I do that in python code?
You might see a pattern. Is this on Windows?
Well, yes, but I'm not 100%. Th
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>
>> Try instrumenting the actual calls to the lowest-level socket methods
>> (recv() and send()) and log for each one the arguments, return time,
>> and how long it took.
>
> Can I do that in python code?
Probably if
I replaced the RAID controller, the old data was still intact, so I brought
the temporary machine down and the new machine up. Everything seems to work
just fine, so happy svn-up'ing.
(I will reboot mail.python.org for a few minutes, to check its serial
console configuration, but that shouldn't af
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Thomas Wouters wrote:
>
> I replaced the RAID controller, the old data was still intact, so I brought
> the temporary machine down and the new machine up. Everything seems to work
> just fine, so happy svn-up'ing.
> (I will reboot mail.python.org for a few minutes,
Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> It looks like you need to add some tests for the bugs you fixed to
> test_mimetypes. While you're at it, you could improve that test
> generally, since it's not exactly extensive.
Okay, I'll try to do this sometime in the next few days, if I get the chance.
> Then, you
Chris Withers simplistix.co.uk> writes:
>
> Well, it's locked at 25% on a quad core box, so yeah, I'd say something
> is wrong
>
> I guess I could try profile it and finding out where most of the time is
> being spent?
I guess you could indeed :-)
Antoine.
19 matches
Mail list logo
