Anthony Baxter wrote:
> Unless the fans are perfectly balanced, small changes in gravity are
> going to affect the rate at which they spin. So I guess the
> position of the moon will affect it :-)
A standard gravitational field could also be important
to eliminate relativistic effects.
So we n
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > I really, really wish that every feature proposal for Python had
to meet
> > > some burden of proof
Ben North wrote:
> > This is what I understood the initial posting to python-ideas to be
> > about.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm suggesting that the standards
Steve Holden wrote:
> Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On Feb 15, 2007, at 6:27 AM, Anthony Baxter wrote:
>>
>>> On Thursday 15 February 2007 21:48, Steve Holden wrote:
Greg Ewing wrote:
> Steve Holden wrote:
>> A further data point is that
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Feb 15, 2007, at 6:27 AM, Anthony Baxter wrote:
>
>> On Thursday 15 February 2007 21:48, Steve Holden wrote:
>>> Greg Ewing wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
> A further data point is that modern machines seem to give
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 15, 2007, at 6:27 AM, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> On Thursday 15 February 2007 21:48, Steve Holden wrote:
>> Greg Ewing wrote:
>>> Steve Holden wrote:
A further data point is that modern machines seem to give
timing variabilities due to C
On Thursday 15 February 2007 21:48, Steve Holden wrote:
> Greg Ewing wrote:
> > Steve Holden wrote:
> >> A further data point is that modern machines seem to give
> >> timing variabilities due to CPU temperature variations even if
> >> you always eat exactly the same thing.
> >
> > Oh, great. Now w
Greg Ewing wrote:
> Steve Holden wrote:
>
>> A further data point is that modern machines seem to give timing
>> variabilities due to CPU temperature variations even if you always eat
>> exactly the same thing.
>
> Oh, great. Now we're going to have to run our
> benchmarks in a temperature-cont
On 2/14/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I was trying to say there is that the proposal of new ideas should not
> begin with "Hey, I think this might be 'good'" - that's too ill defined. It
> should be, "I noticed (myself/my users/my students/other open source
> projects) wr
Steve Holden wrote:
> A further data point is that modern machines seem to give timing
> variabilities due to CPU temperature variations even if you always eat
> exactly the same thing.
Oh, great. Now we're going to have to run our
benchmarks in a temperature-controlled oven...
--
Greg
___
On 01:04 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>> I really, really wish that every feature proposal for Python had to meet
>> some burden of proof [...]. I suspect this would kill 90% of "hey
>> wouldn't this syntax be neat" proposals on day zero [...]
>
>This is what I understood the
Steve Holden schrieb:
> Ben North wrote:
> [...]
>> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>> I missed discussion of the source of the 1%. Does it slow down pystone
>>> or other benchmarks by 1%? That would be really odd, since I can't
>>> imagine that the code path changes in any way for code that doesn't
>>> u
Ben North wrote:
[...]
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> I missed discussion of the source of the 1%. Does it slow down pystone
>> or other benchmarks by 1%? That would be really odd, since I can't
>> imagine that the code path changes in any way for code that doesn't
>> use the feature. Is it that the
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> This seems to be the overwhelming feedback at this point, so I'm
> withdrawing my support for the proposal. I hope that Ben can write up
> a PEP and mark it rejected, to summarize the discussion; it's been a
> useful lesson.
The feedback is clear, yes. The "new syntax se
13 matches
Mail list logo
