The discussion on this topic seems to have died down. However, I had a look at the patch and here are some comments:This has the potential to speed up simple strings expressions likes = '1' + '2' + '3' + '4' + '5' + '6' + '7' + '8'
However, if this is followed bys += '9' this (the 9th string) will
Doesn't it end up in a call to PyString_Concat()?
That should return a PyStringConcatenationObject too, right?
K
Construct like s = a + b + c + d + e , where a, b etc. have been
assigned string values earlier will not benefit from the patch.
__
My statement wasn't clear enough.Rendering occurs if the string being concatenated is already a concatenation object created by an earlier assignment. In s = a + b + c + d + e + f , there would be rendering of the source string if it is already a concatenation.
Here is an example that would make it
Chetan Pandya wrote:
> My statement wasn't clear enough.
>
> Rendering occurs if the string being concatenated is already a
> concatenation object created by an earlier assignment.
>
I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. My reading of the patch
doesn't suggest that at all. The operatio
Chetan Pandya wrote:
> The deallocation code needs to be robust for a complex tree - it is
> currently not recursive, but needs to be, like the concatenation code.
It is already both those things.
Deallocation is definitely recursive. See Objects/stringobject.c,
function (*ahem*) recursive_deal
[http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1579370&group_id=5470&atid=105470]
Hello,
I'm managed to provoke a segfault in python2.5 (occasionally it just a
"invalid argument to internal function" error). I've posted a
traceback and a general idea of what the code consists of in th
"Mike Klaas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1579370&group_id=5470&atid=105470]
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm managed to provoke a segfault in python2.5 (occasionally it just a
> "invalid argument to internal function" error). I've posted a
> traceback
On 18-Oct-2006, at 22:08 , Michael Hudson wrote:
>> Unfortunately, I've been attempting for hours to
>> reduce the problem to a completely self-contained script, but it is
>> resisting my efforts due to timing problems.
Has anyone ever tried to use helgrind (the valgrind module, not the
heavy m
On 10/18/06, Michael Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Mike Klaas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've been reading the bug report with interest, but unless I can
> reproduce it it's mighty hard for me to debug, as I'm sure you know.
Indeed.
> > Unfortunately, I've been attempting for hours to
I got up in the middle of the night and wrote the email - and it shows.Apologies for creating confusion. My comments below.-ChetanOn 10/18/06,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:04:14 -0700From: Larry Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] PATCH submitted: Speed up + for s
[Michael Hudson]
>> I've been reading the bug report with interest, but unless I can
>> reproduce it it's mighty hard for me to debug, as I'm sure you know.
[Mike Klaas]
> Indeed.
Note that I just attached a much simpler pure-Python script that fails
very quickly, on Windows, using a debug build.
On 10/18/06, Tim Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Mike Klaas]
> > Indeed.
>
> Note that I just attached a much simpler pure-Python script that fails
> very quickly, on Windows, using a debug build. Read the new comment
> to learn why both "Windows" and "debug build" are essential to it
> faili
Chetan Pandya wrote:
I don't have a patch build, since I didn't download the revision
used by the patch.
However, I did look at values in the debugger and it looked like x in
your example above had a reference count of 2 or more within
string_concat even when there were no other assignme
13 matches
Mail list logo
