Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

> If someone were to volunteer to set up and run speed.python.org, I think we could add some additional focus on performance regressions. Right now, we don't have any way of reliably and reproducibly testing Python performance. I'm very interested in speed.python.org and feel regret that the proje

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 3:49 PM, R. David Murray wrote: > On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 12:04:10 +0200, Maciej Fijalkowski > wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:38 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: >> > On 02.06.2015 21:07, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> >> >> There was a PSF-sponsored effort to improve

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 12:04:10 +0200, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote: > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:38 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > > On 02.06.2015 21:07, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote: > >> Hi > >> > >> There was a PSF-sponsored effort to improve the situation with the > >> https://bitbucket.org/pypy/codespeed2/

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:38 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > On 02.06.2015 21:07, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote: >> Hi >> >> There was a PSF-sponsored effort to improve the situation with the >> https://bitbucket.org/pypy/codespeed2/src being written (thank you >> PSF). It's not better enough than codespeed

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 02.06.2015 21:07, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote: > Hi > > There was a PSF-sponsored effort to improve the situation with the > https://bitbucket.org/pypy/codespeed2/src being written (thank you > PSF). It's not better enough than codespeed that I would like, but > gives some opportunities. > > That

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 3:08 PM Maciej Fijalkowski wrote: > Hi > > There was a PSF-sponsored effort to improve the situation with the > https://bitbucket.org/pypy/codespeed2/src being written (thank you > PSF). It's not better enough than codespeed that I would like, but > gives some opportunities

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

Hi There was a PSF-sponsored effort to improve the situation with the https://bitbucket.org/pypy/codespeed2/src being written (thank you PSF). It's not better enough than codespeed that I would like, but gives some opportunities. That said, we have a benchmark machine for benchmarking cpython and

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

Hello, On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 13:14:27 +0200 "M.-A. Lemburg" wrote: [] > > The "7.0x faster" number on speed.pypy.org would be significantly > > *higher* if we upgraded the baseline to 2.7.10 now. > > If someone were to volunteer to set up and run speed.python.org, > I think we could add some add

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 01.06.2015 12:44, Armin Rigo wrote: > Hi Larry, > > On 31 May 2015 at 01:20, Larry Hastings wrote: >> p.s. Supporting this patch also helps cut into PyPy's reported performance >> lead--that is, if they ever upgrade speed.pypy.org from comparing against >> Python *2.7.2*. > > Right, we should

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

Hi Larry, On 31 May 2015 at 01:20, Larry Hastings wrote: > p.s. Supporting this patch also helps cut into PyPy's reported performance > lead--that is, if they ever upgrade speed.pypy.org from comparing against > Python *2.7.2*. Right, we should do this upgrade when 2.7.11 is out. There is some

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

2015-05-31 0:26 GMT+02:00 Nick Coghlan : > > On 31 May 2015 04:20, "Ludovic Gasc" wrote: > > > > For now, I'm following the mailing-lists from a spy-glass: I don't read > most of the e-mails. > > However, this thread seems to be "infected": I can smell from here your > emotions behind your words.

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 31 May 2015 at 08:37, Greg Ewing wrote: > Nick Coghlan wrote: > >> We've long had a requirement that certain kinds of proposal come with >> at least nominal support commitments from the folks proposing them >> (e.g. adding modules to the standard library, supporting new >> platforms). Instituti

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 31 May 2015 at 09:20, Larry Hastings wrote: > On 05/30/2015 07:26 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > > Porting performance features from python 3 to python 2 has the disadvantage > of cutting into a compelling business case for users to move forward to > python 3.[1] so doing this has a cost to pyth

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

Nick Coghlan wrote: We've long had a requirement that certain kinds of proposal come with at least nominal support commitments from the folks proposing them (e.g. adding modules to the standard library, supporting new platforms). Institutions with a clear financial interest in a particular probl

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 05/30/2015 07:26 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: Porting performance features from python 3 to python 2 has the disadvantage of cutting into a compelling business case for users to move forward to python 3.[1] so doing this has a cost to python 3 adoption. But, the question is whether there i

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 31 May 2015 04:20, "Ludovic Gasc" wrote: > > For now, I'm following the mailing-lists from a spy-glass: I don't read most of the e-mails. > However, this thread seems to be "infected": I can smell from here your emotions behind your words. > > Why to push a lot of emotions inside a technical di

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

For now, I'm following the mailing-lists from a spy-glass: I don't read most of the e-mails. However, this thread seems to be "infected": I can smell from here your emotions behind your words. Why to push a lot of emotions inside a technical discussion ? What's the nerves have been hit with this d

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On May 30, 2015, at 06:55 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >Intel are looking to get involved in CPython core development >*specifically* to work on performance improvements, so it's important >to offer folks in the community good reasons for why we're OK with >seeing at least some of that work applied to

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On May 30, 2015 1:56 AM, "Nick Coghlan" wrote: > > Being ready, willing and able to handle the kind of situation created > by the Python 2->3 community transition is a large part of what it > means to offer commercial support for community driven open source > projects, as it buys customers' time

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

Hi Christian, > Antoine, > > now your are putting it over the top. You make it sound like I'm some > crazy environmentalist or eco-warrior. Well, I'm not. I apologize for misrepresenting your position. I still don't think discussing environmental matters is really productive here, though :-) R

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

Antoine Pitrou writes: > > In a community of volunteers, ideology is typically a great > > motivator. > > If and only everyone agrees on it. That, my friend, is *your* ideology speaking. Some people work on open source to scratch technical itches -- the program doesn't do what they want, th

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

Who said anything about funding? this is a thread about the patch Intel offered (and had committed). And that's the point. This is the thread about THAT patch. Why are we hijacking this topic for an environmental debate? If it is a legitimate topic (which it might be), discuss it in its ow

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 30 May 2015 at 21:37, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Sat, 30 May 2015 21:20:56 +1000 > Nick Coghlan wrote: >> Given the extensive complaints about the lack of corporate >> contribution to upstream CPython maintenance, the hostile reaction to >> a concrete proposal for such ongoing contributions ha

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 2015-05-30 14:03, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > No, it's up to the proponent to prove that the effect exists, with > a magnitude large enough to make any interesting difference. That's > part of the process when suggesting a change. > > If it doesn't,

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

Le 30/05/2015 13:51, Stephen J. Turnbull a écrit : > Antoine Pitrou writes: > > On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200 > > Christian Heimes wrote: > > > For performance patches we have to consider our responsibility for the > > > environment. Every improvement means more speed and less power > >

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

Antoine Pitrou writes: > On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200 > Christian Heimes wrote: > > For performance patches we have to consider our responsibility for the > > environment. Every improvement means more speed and less power > > consumption. Python runs of hundreds of thousands of machines

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Sat, 30 May 2015 21:20:56 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: > Given the extensive complaints about the lack of corporate > contribution to upstream CPython maintenance, the hostile reaction to > a concrete proposal for such ongoing contributions has been both > incredibly surprising *and* disappointing

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 30 May 2015 at 20:58, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Sat, 30 May 2015 18:55:20 +1000 > Nick Coghlan wrote: >> On 30 May 2015 10:46, "Alexander Walters" wrote: >> > >> > Python is a giant cache-miss generator. A little performance boost on the >> > opt-code dispatch isn't going to change that mu

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Sat, 30 May 2015 20:52:21 +1000 > Chris Angelico wrote: >> >> Suppose someone came up with a magic patch that makes the CPython core >> run 25% faster. No downsides, just 25% faster across the board. I >> wouldn't pay money for it on the

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Sat, 30 May 2015 20:52:21 +1000 Chris Angelico wrote: > > Suppose someone came up with a magic patch that makes the CPython core > run 25% faster. No downsides, just 25% faster across the board. I > wouldn't pay money for it on the sole basis of expecting to make that > back in reduced electri

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 30 May 2015 at 20:35, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Sat, 30 May 2015 10:34:15 +1000 > Nick Coghlan wrote: >> On 30 May 2015 09:57, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote: >> > >> > On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200 >> > Christian Heimes wrote: >> > > For performance patches we have to consider our responsibil

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Sat, 30 May 2015 18:55:20 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 30 May 2015 10:46, "Alexander Walters" wrote: > > > > Python is a giant cache-miss generator. A little performance boost on the > > opt-code dispatch isn't going to change that much. If we really do care > > about improving python to

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Sat, 30 May 2015 10:34:15 +1000 > Nick Coghlan wrote: >> On 30 May 2015 09:57, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote: >> > >> > On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200 >> > Christian Heimes wrote: >> > > For performance patches we have to consider our res

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Sat, 30 May 2015 10:34:15 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 30 May 2015 09:57, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote: > > > > On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200 > > Christian Heimes wrote: > > > For performance patches we have to consider our responsibility for the > > > environment. Every improvement means mo

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 30 May 2015 10:46, "Alexander Walters" wrote: > > Python is a giant cache-miss generator. A little performance boost on the > opt-code dispatch isn't going to change that much. If we really do care > about improving python to do less environmental damage, then that is a > discussion we sho

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

Python is a giant cache-miss generator. A little performance boost on the opt-code dispatch isn't going to change that much. If we really do care about improving python to do less environmental damage, then that is a discussion we should be having on it's own merits. It was really out of pla

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 30 May 2015 09:57, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote: > > On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200 > Christian Heimes wrote: > > For performance patches we have to consider our responsibility for the > > environment. Every improvement means more speed and less power > > consumption. Python runs of hundreds of

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Sat, 30 May 2015 01:49:10 +0200 Christian Heimes wrote: > For performance patches we have to consider our responsibility for the > environment. Every improvement means more speed and less power > consumption. Python runs of hundreds of thousands of machines in the > cloud. Python 2.7 will be us

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 2015-05-29 23:14, Gregory P. Smith wrote: > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan > wrote: > > > On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, "Victor Stinner" > wrote: > > > > Why not continue to enhance Python 3 instead of w

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 30 May 2015 09:21, "Barry Warsaw" wrote: > > On May 29, 2015, at 04:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > >There are a fair number of people on this thread whose employer pays them to > >work on Python. > > My guess is that as Python 2.7 gets longer in the tooth, and it becomes harder > to motivat

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Ian Cordasco > wrote: >> >> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Gregory P. Smith wrote: >> > >> > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, "Victor

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On May 29, 2015, at 04:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >There are a fair number of people on this thread whose employer pays them to >work on Python. My guess is that as Python 2.7 gets longer in the tooth, and it becomes harder to motivate volunteers to shepherd contributed patches into Python 2,

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Gregory P. Smith wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan > wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, "Victor Stinner" > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > Why not continue to enhance Python 3

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On 30 May 2015 07:14, "Gregory P. Smith" wrote: > > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan wrote: >> >> >> On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, "Victor Stinner" wrote: >> > >> > Why not continue to enhance Python 3 instead of wasting our time with >> > Python 2? We have limited resources in term of

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 4:14 PM, Gregory P. Smith wrote: > > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan wrote: >> >> >> On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, "Victor Stinner" >> wrote: >> > >> > Why not continue to enhance Python 3 instead of wasting our time with >> > Python 2? We have limited resources

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 is here until 2020, please don't call it a waste.

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:24 AM Nick Coghlan wrote: > > On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, "Victor Stinner" > wrote: > > > > Why not continue to enhance Python 3 instead of wasting our time with > > Python 2? We have limited resources in term of developers to maintain > > Python. > > > > (I'm not talking