On 24 March 2018 at 09:49, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Of course we don't want to necessarily impose unreasonable performance >> and maintence costs on any implementation. But surely performance >> cost is a quality of implementation issue. It ought to be a matter of >> trade-offs: is the benefit sufficient to make up for the cost? > > I don't see where this comes in. Let's say that Jython can't implement > this feature without a 10% slowdown in run-time performance even if > these subscopes aren't used. What are you saying the PEP should say? > That it's okay for this feature to hurt performance by 10%? Then it > should be rightly rejected. Or that Jython is allowed to ignore this > feature? Or what?
I think the PEP should confirm that there's not expected to be a showstopper performance cost in implementing this feature in other Python implementations. That doesn't have to be a big deal - reaching out to the Jython, PyPy, Cython etc implementors and asking them for a quick sanity check that this doesn't impose unmanageable overheads should be sufficient. No need to make this too dogmatic. Paul _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
