Terry Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> wrote: > Actually, Unladen Swallow is now targeted at 3.1; its developers have > conservatively proposed its integration in CPython 3.3. I would not be > completely shocked if it happens in 3.2.
Why do I feel like there's less of an onus on Unladen Swallow to _actually prove itself in substantial real world usage_ before integration into CPython than there is on even the smallest of modules for inclusion in the standard library? Are we really expected to just ditch everything we know about CPython's performance characteristics just for some questionable and possibly uneven gains? I've been a big supporter of Py3 from the beginning, but this repeated claim of US becoming the mainline interpreter for 3.x pretty much kills dead a lot of my interest. What am I not seeing amidst the high memory usage and variable performance results of US's _custom-made_ benchmarks? Doesn't that fact alone worry anyone else? Or that LLVM is listed as only having "partial support" with non-Cygwin x86 Windows? Yes, I'd _love_ Python to be faster, who wouldn't? But I'm not seeing the evidence here to support the almost unbridled eagerness that's being demonstrated. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list