Re: [pypy-dev] Hacking at tarfile.py and gzip.py

[Armin Rigo]

Re-hi,

On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Armin Rigo  wrote:
> If you do helpful performance fixes, they are probably helpful for
> CPython, too, and so they should go to the CPython issue tracker.

...or, I just saw this kind of check-in: "pypy doesn't like adding
empty strings."  Instead of "fixing" it in tarfile.py, this is really
an issue in PyPy: maybe the addition of an empty string and another
string is not special-cased to just return the other string, as it
would be in CPython.  If so, then tarfile.py is just a real-life
example of why it's a good idea, and we should fix PyPy's strings
instead.


A bientôt,

Armin.
___
pypy-dev mailing list
pypy-dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev

[pypy-dev] Hacking at tarfile.py and gzip.py

[Armin Rigo]

Hi Justin,

I see that you're hacking at CPython's tarfile.py and gzip.py, for
performance reason.  I should warn you that it's probably a bad idea.
For example, when we moved from supporting 2.5 to 2.7, we didn't
manually convert all the stuff in modified-2.5; we just mostly ignored
it and took the few still-relevant changes (the rest was fixed in
CPython itself in the meantime).  In other words, "modified-*" is only
supposed to be there to fix real issues that appear on PyPy and not on
CPython.

We have no place to put specifically performance improvements, and
that's good, because we don't want to diverge from CPython's stdlib.
If you do helpful performance fixes, they are probably helpful for
CPython, too, and so they should go to the CPython issue tracker.

Also, a check-in to pypy/module/bz2/interp_bz2.py has the message "fix
bz2. tests didn't find this."  But it doesn't add any test.  This is
also a bad idea.  If it really fixes an issue, it must come either
with a test that shows it, or a lengthy explanation of why you
couldn't design a test.


A bientôt,

Armin.
___
pypy-dev mailing list
pypy-dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev