On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 9:00 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > On Sat, 30 May 2015 20:52:21 +1000 > Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Suppose someone came up with a magic patch that makes the CPython core >> run 25% faster. No downsides, just 25% faster across the board. I >> wouldn't pay money for it on the sole basis of expecting to make that >> back in reduced electricity bills, but I certainly wouldn't be sorry >> to watch the load averages drop. Why is this controversial? > > That was not my point. What I'm opposing is the idea that > "environmental sustainability" (or what people's ideological conception > of it is) should become part of our criteria when making maintenance > decisions. > > Obviously if a patch makes CPython faster without any downsides, there > is no need to argue about environmental sustainability to make the > patch desirable. The performance improvement itself is a sufficient > reason.
Okay. But what objection do you have to reduced electricity usage? I'm still not understanding how this is a problem. It might not be a priority for everyone, but surely it's a nice bonus? ChrisA _______________________________________________ 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
