On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Ben Finney <ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au> wrote: > You misunderstand me. I'm not saying the optimisations would be > crippled. I am saying that, in order to achieve those optimisations, the > *test code* would be crippled. > > I am pointing out that the assumption necessary for the optimisation > BartC is advocating – the optimisation of module attributes to be > immutable after compilation – depends on crippling the *functionality* > needed for many uses, including test code uses. > > Since the compiler should not be in the position of deciding whether > code is test code or not, it cannot use that criterion to decide whether > to enable or disable the optimisation. > > So either the optimisation should never be enabled (my perference), or > test code will unwittingly be crippled by the assumptions needed for > that optimisation.
Hmm, then I was misunderstanding what BartC was advocating. I didn't think it would *fail* in the presence of dynamic attributes, but merely *perform suboptimally* (and presumably worse than current CPython). If it does indeed require crippling the functionality, then I agree, this is a bad idea. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list