Marc-Andre Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> added the comment: Brett Cannon wrote: > > Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> added the comment: > > So I see a couple of objections here to the idea that I will try to address. > > First is MAL's thinking that this will undo any C code, which it won't. The > idea is that stdlib modules that do not inherently rely on other C code (e.g. > sqlite3 does not fall underneath this) would have a pure Python > implementation with possible C enhancements. In the case of datetime that > code is done, so it won't go anywhere. In this case it would be bringing in a > pure Python implementation like the one PyPy maintains. You can look at heapq > if you want an existing example of what it looks like to maintain a pure > Python and C version of a module.
So the proposal is to have something like we have for pickle, with cPickle being the fast version and pickle.py the slow Python one ? Since no CPython would use the Python version, who would be supporting the Python-only version ? ---------- title: Add pure Python implementation of datetime module to CPython -> Transition time/datetime C modules to Python _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue7989> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
