On Sat, 7 Sep 2013 08:57:07 +0200 Xavier Morel <python-...@masklinn.net> wrote: > > On 2013-09-07, at 05:40 , Jesus Cea wrote: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > On 06/09/13 20:33, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > >> On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 18:14:26 +0200 Jesus Cea <j...@jcea.es> wrote: > >>> > >>> It is intrusive. Yes. I think it must be, by its own nature. > >>> Probably room for improvement and code transparency. But... are > >>> Python-DEVs interested in the project?. That is the point :) > >> > >> As a concrete data point: - here are Dave's modifications to > >> ceval.c for systemtap: > >> http://bugs.python.org/review/14776/diff/5177/Python/ceval.c - here > >> are your modifications to ceval.c for dtrace: > >> http://bugs.python.org/review/13405/diff/6151/Python/ceval.c > > > > Unfair, because that code is not doing the same thing. > > > > Most of the extra complexity is there to deal with DTRACE ability to > > provide meaningful stackframes, with Python code instead of CPython > > evaluation loop. This is kind of magical. > > Antoine will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe his point is less > about the complexity of dtrace provision and more about how much of it > lives in ceval.c: the systemtap provision also takes quite a bit of > code, but almost all of that code is extracted into a separate file and > only a pair of calls live in ceval.c
Yes, that's exactly my point. There can be an arbitrarily complex ceval-dtrace.h for all I care :-) Thanks for the examples, by the way. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
