Collin Winter <coll...@gmail.com> added the comment: Jeffrey: updated the patch to address your concerns.
Martin: I'm not sure I completely understand it either, though it seems similar to issue4477. In the course of developing this patch, I tried also #ifdef'ing out all usages of the Py_Py3kWarningFlag global. This actually made things slower by around 5% across all the benchmarks I tested. Could be pipeline stalls or a code size issue, I really don't know. I'm not 100% convinced that something like this should go into CPython, as a different compiler/hardware combination could well render it moot. I mostly wanted a record of it, in case those few Python deployments with homogeneous compilers/hardware across their machines that might care about 1% better performance are interested. Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file13183/no_py3k_warning.patch _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue5362> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
