On 2019-04-27 11:26, Mark Shannon wrote:
Performance improvements include, but aren't limited to:
1. Much faster calls to common classes: range(), set(), type(), list(),
etc.
That's not specific to PEP 590. It can be done with any proposal. I know
that there is the ABI issue with PEP 580, but
On 2019-04-27 11:26, Mark Shannon wrote:
Specifically, and this is important, PEP 580 cannot implement efficient
calls to class objects without breaking the ABI.
First of all, the layout of PyTypeObject isn't actually part of the
stable ABI (see PEP 384). So, we wouldn't be breaking anything b
Hi,
On 15/04/2019 9:34 am, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2019-04-14 13:34, Mark Shannon wrote:
I'll address capability first.
I don't think that comparing "capability" makes a lot of sense since
neither PEP 580 nor PEP 590 adds any new capabilities to CPython. They
are meant to allow doing thing
On 2019-04-14 13:34, Mark Shannon wrote:
I'll address capability first.
I don't think that comparing "capability" makes a lot of sense since
neither PEP 580 nor PEP 590 adds any new capabilities to CPython. They
are meant to allow doing things faster, not to allow more things.
And yes, the
