On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Victor Stinner
wrote:
The second result is a new perf module which includes all "tricks"
> discovered in my research: compute average and standard deviation,
> spawn multiple worker child processes, automatically calibrate the
> number of outter-loop iterations, a
On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 1:11 AM, Benjamin Peterson
wrote:
> So, what say you to updating PEP 7 to allow C99 features for Python 3.6
> (in so much as GCC and MSVC support them)?
>
+1
# Meador
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://ma
On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 2:23 AM, Cesare Di Mauro
wrote:
> Just one thing that comes to my mind: is the stack depth calculation
> routine changed? It was suboptimal, and calculating a better number
> decreases stack allocation, and increases the frame usage.
>
This is still a problem and came up
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
Cool. While you're at it, the compatibility restriction for modulefinder
> could also be lifted.
+1
The question of modulefinder actually came up recently*:
http://bugs.python.org/issue26881
-- Meador
* Posting here for reference. Tho
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Within the Python context, the analogy from setattr and setitem at the
> Python level to Py_SETREF at the C level is pretty solid, so it likely
> makes sense to run with that as "good enough".
>
> In regards to Py_MOVEREF, while other langua
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Serhiy Storchaka
wrote:
On 21.12.15 23:57, Steve Dower wrote:
>
>> Was Py_MOVEREF (or MOVE_REF) ever suggested?
>>
>
> This would be nice name. The macro moves the ownership. But I think it's
> too late. Otherwise we'll never finish the bikeshedding.
FWIW, I lik
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 3:23 AM, Victor Stinner
wrote:
> Note: I propose "noopt" because we already have "optimization level 0"
> which still uses optimizations, it's the default mode. It's different
> than gcc -O0 which really disables all optimizations. I already prefix
> the "noopt" suffix for
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Serhiy Storchaka
> wrote:
>>
>> On 08.07.15 01:45, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>>>
>>> P.S. I don't think python-dev post was necessary or helpful (and I still
>>> haven't had a chance to read the whole thre
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Larry Hastings wrote:
Contestant 1: "Add .clinic.h"
>
> foo.c -> foo.c.clinic.h
> foo.h -> foo.h.clinic.h
>
> -0
> Contestant 2: "Add .ac.h"
>
> foo.c -> foo.c.ac.h
> foo.h -> foo.h.ac.h
>
> -1
> Contestant 3: "Add .clinic"
>
> foo.c -> foo.c.clinic
> foo.h -
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:22:12 -0800
> Larry Hastings wrote:
> >
> > https://bitbucket.org/larry/clinic-buffer-samples/src
> >
> > In it I converted Modules/_pickle.c four different ways. There's a
> > README, please read it.
>
> I'm +1 o
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Aren't you talking about the struct module? In ctypes, it seems it
> would be sufficient to add a "c_int128" type (and/or "c_uint128").
Even in ctypes these codes are used internally for the field descriptors.
For ctypes "c_int128" seems rea
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Dec 20, 2012, at 02:54 PM, Trent Nelson wrote:
>
>>On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:52:56AM -0800, Trent Nelson wrote:
>>> I'll work on setting the ARM boards up next week.
>>
>>Does anyone have a preference regarding the operating syste
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Victor Stinner
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I started to implement an AST optimizer in Python. It's easy to create
> a new AST tree, so I'm surprised that I didn't find any existing
> project.
>
> https://bitbucket.org/haypo/misc/src/tip/python/ast_optimizer.py
Very cool.
>
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Thomas Heller wrote:
> So, I have uploaded a patch and asked for review (since I'm not 1000%
> sure that it is absolutely correct):
>
> http://bugs.python.org/issue15459
I'll take a look at this in the next few days.
-- Meador
___
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Jesus Cea wrote:
>> As for the tests, I intentionally kept them the way that Serhiy
>> contributed them -- using >= instead of >. I kept them this way
>> because we also discussed in issue14596 the prospect of optimizing
>> the way repeat counts are handled. Th
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 18:38:30 +0200
> Jesus Cea wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 23/07/12 18:27, Meador Inge wrote:
>> > Doc/ACKS.txt is *only* for acknowledging d
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM, jesus.cea wrote:
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b9a3ed1b14b9
> changeset: 78260:b9a3ed1b14b9
> parent: 78257:03063e718f5f
> parent: 78259:1911e192af0d
> user:Jesus Cea
> date:Mon Jul 23 18:16:18 2012 +0200
> summary:
> MERGE: Be
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Meador Inge wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 8:55 PM, r.david.murray
> wrote:
>
>> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/80b81658455b
>> changeset: 78246:80b81658455b
>> parent: 78244:c43d73277756
>> parent: 78245:b97
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 8:55 PM, r.david.murray
wrote:
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/80b81658455b
> changeset: 78246:80b81658455b
> parent: 78244:c43d73277756
> parent: 78245:b97f65f2298d
> user:R David Murray
> date:Sun Jul 22 21:53:54 2012 -0400
> summary:
>
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:06 AM, wrote:
> I hereby predict that Microsoft will revert this decision, and that VS
> Express
> 11 will be able to build CPython.
And your prediction was right on :-) :
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/visualstudio/archive/2012/06/08/visual-studio-express-2012-for-windows-de
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Christian Tismer wrote:
> Is the usage of dir() correct in this context or is the doc right?
> It would be nice to add a sentence of clarification if the use of
> dir() is in fact the correct way to implement inspect.
There is already a note in the inspect.getmem
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Ned Deily wrote:
> Chances are you are using llvm-gcc-4.2, the default CC for Xcode 4.2.
Yup:
motherbrain:python meadori$ sw_vers
ProductName:Mac OS X
ProductVersion: 10.7.2
BuildVersion: 11C74
motherbrain:python meadori$ gcc --version
i686-apple-darwin11-l
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> PS. I would propose a specific fix but I can't seem to build a working
> CPython from the trunk on my laptop (OS X 10.6, Xcode 4.1). I get this error
> late in the build:
>
> ./python.exe -SE -m sysconfig --generate-posix-vars
> Fatal Pyt
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 5:32 AM, vinay.sajip wrote:
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/73dad4940b88
> changeset: 74538:73dad4940b88
> branch: 3.1
I thought that the 3.1 branch is in security mode? Is this a security
related fix?
>From my brief scan of the changeset, it doesn't seem to be.
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Nadeem Vawda wrote:
> "liblzma-dev"; on Fedora I believe the correct package is "xz-devel".
"xz-devel" is right. I just verified a build of the new module on a
fresh F16 system.
--
Meador
___
Python-Dev mailing list
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Stefan Krah wrote:
> Ezio Melotti wrote:
>>> +@unittest.skipIf(not have_long_long, 'need long long support')
>>
>> I think this would read better with skipUnless and s/have/has/:
>>
>> @unittest.skipUnless(HAS_LONG_LONG, 'need long long support')
>
> skipUnless(
Hi All,
I have been investing some 'tokenize' bugs recently. As a part of
that investigation I was trying to use '-m tokenize', which works
great in 2.x:
[meadori@motherbrain cpython]$ python2.7 -m tokenize test.py
1,0-1,5:NAME'print'
1,6-1,21: STRING '"Hello, World!"'
1,21-1,
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 11:58 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> Dan, I once had the more or less the same opinion/question as you with
> regard to ctypes, but I now see at least 3 problems.
>
> 1) It seems hard to write it correctly. There are currently 47 open ctypes
> issues, with 9 being feature reques
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:20 AM, anatoly techtonik wrote:
> This happened, because of poor bug management, where community doesn't
> play any role in determining which issues are desired.
> This mostly because of limitation of our tracker and desire of people
> to extend it to get damn "stars", mo
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> A feature request on the tracker is the best way to make that happen.
>
Done - http://bugs.python.org/issue9969. Thanks for the feedback everyone.
-- Meador
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev
Hi All,
I was going through some of the open issues related to 'tokenize' and ran
across 'issue2180'. The reproduction case for this issue is along the lines
of:
>>> tokenize.tokenize(io.StringIO("if 1:\n \\\n #hey\n print 1").readline)
but, with 'py3k' I get:
>>> tokenize.tokenize(io.Str
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 8:10 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> For the record, I've added to the untabify script a patch rewriting option
> ("-p") which reindents all patch hunks for C files containing tabs. It
> should
> minimize manual reformatting work with existing patches.
>
I just tried '-p' with
> In other words, I think the goal is not just to add new developers to
> the community, but to continue to build a strong community of developers.
FWIW, from a Python community newbie that has submitted a few patches and
commented on the tracker for a few months, I agree with this statement and
t
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Le Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:29:09 -0600,
> s...@pobox.com a écrit :
> >
> > Traditionally Python has run on some (minority) platforms where C++
> > was unavailable.
>
> Is this concern still valid? We are in the 2010s now.
> I'm not saying I wan
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Thomas Heller wrote:
> See issue 887237:
>
> http://bugs.python.org/issue887237
>
Thanks for the link Thomas. Since there is already interest in adding
arithmetic to ctypes, perhaps that is an option. One question that raises
in my mind, though, is should only
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Meador Inge wrote:
>
> 3. Using Decimal keeps the desired precision,
>>
>
> Well, sort of, but then you end up doing arithmetic in
> decimal instead of binary, which could give different
> results.
>
Even w
Hi All,
Recently some discussion began in the issue 3132 thread (
http://bugs.python.org/issue3132) regarding
implementation of the new struct string syntax for PEP 3118. Mark Dickinson
suggested that I bring the discussion on over to Python Dev. Below is a
summary
of the questions\comments from
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 9:35 PM, David Lyon wrote:
> One problem is that in many places, users are trained specifically
> under windows to *never* run anything in a zip file. As it might
> contain a virus and "bring down the whole company network".
I have even hit cases where Windows flat out bloc
> We really do need precise descriptions of the problems so we can avoid
them.
Initialization of objects with static storage duration typically get a bad
wrap for two main reasons: (1) each toolchain implements them differently
(but typically by storing initialization thunks in a table that is wal
39 matches
Mail list logo
