Re: [Python-Dev] Design Philosophy: Performance vs Robustness/Maintainability

2017-07-18 Thread Brett Cannon
On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 at 09:07 Ethan Furman wrote: > Raymond Hettinger: > - > > One minor grumble: I think we need to give careful cost/benefit > considerations to > > optimizations that complicate the implementation. Over the last > several years, the > > source for Python has

Re: [Python-Dev] Design Philosophy: Performance vs Robustness/Maintainability

2017-07-18 Thread Ethan Furman
On 07/18/2017 09:16 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 09:08:08 -0700 Ethan Furman wrote: Nick Coughlan: - It is "Nick Coghlan" not "Coughlan". Argh. Sorry, Nick, and thank you, Antoine! As another example of this: while trading the global import lock for per-modu

Re: [Python-Dev] Design Philosophy: Performance vs Robustness/Maintainability

2017-07-18 Thread Victor Stinner
2017-07-18 18:08 GMT+02:00 Ethan Furman : > Raymond Hettinger: > - >> And complexity leads to bugs >> (the C >> optimization of random number seeding caused a major bug in the 3.6.0 >> release Hum, I guess that Raymond is referring to http://bugs.python.org/issue29085 This regress

Re: [Python-Dev] Design Philosophy: Performance vs Robustness/Maintainability

2017-07-18 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 09:08:08 -0700 Ethan Furman wrote: > > Nick Coughlan: > - It is "Nick Coghlan" not "Coughlan". > > As another example of this: while trading the global import lock for > > per-module locks eliminated most of the old import deadlocks, it turns > > out that it *als

Re: [Python-Dev] Design Philosophy: Performance vs Robustness/Maintainability

2017-07-18 Thread Victor Stinner
[Python-Dev] Design Philosophy: Performance vs Robustness/Maintainability 2017-07-18 18:08 GMT+02:00 Ethan Furman : > Nick Coughlan: > - >> >> As another example of this: while trading the global import lock for >> per-module locks eliminated most of the old import deadlocks, (...) Mi