Hi Martin, On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 08:12:53AM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote: > If bugs are in the heavily-used parts of the library, like regular > expressions, it doesn't matter much if the original author goes > away for some period of time - other contributors will fix the bugs > that they care about, and not by rewriting the entire thing.
I see no incremental way of fixing some of the downsides of hotshot, like its huge log file size and loading time. I doubt people often find the motivation to dig into this large orphaned piece of software. Instead, they rewrite their own profilers, because writing a basic one is not difficult. It is much less difficult than, say, writing a basic regular expression engine (but even the latter has gotten rewritten at times) -- unless you want to go into the advanced corners mentioned by Tim. Some guys posted their 'lsprof' on SF because it was well-polished and they found it useful, so here I am, arguing for a standard library containing preferably simple pieces of code that work and are practical for the common advertised use case. I'm not even sure in this case why we are arguing: the new piece of code's interface can be made 100% compatible with the documented parts of the previous interface; the previous module has been around for longer but so far it produced half-meaningless numbers due to bugs. A bientot, Armin. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com