ight now, but could
probably be ported from getpathp.c into getpath.c easily.
Cheers,
Steve
Top-posted from my Windows Phone
From: Alexander Walters<mailto:tritium-l...@sdamon.com>
Sent: 5/31/2015 6:39
To: python-dev@python.org<mailto:python-dev@python.
On 1 June 2015 at 00:44, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 5/31/2015 6:59 AM, Alexander Walters wrote:
>>
>> A better course of action would be to deprecate the non-portable
>> version. Other than setting the PATH envvar, why do we need to continue
>> even touching the system on install? It is highly anno
On 5/31/2015 6:59 AM, Alexander Walters wrote:
A better course of action would be to deprecate the non-portable
version. Other than setting the PATH envvar, why do we need to continue
even touching the system on install? It is highly annoying for those of
us that maintain several installs of py
A better course of action would be to deprecate the non-portable
version. Other than setting the PATH envvar, why do we need to continue
even touching the system on install? It is highly annoying for those of
us that maintain several installs of python on a single windows system,
and it reall
On 31 May 2015 at 11:41, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 31 May 2015 at 10:14, Xavier Combelle wrote:
>>> +1. The new embeddable Python distribution for Windows is a great step
>>> forward for this. It's not single-file, but it's easy to produce a
>>> single-directory self-contained application with it. I
On 31 May 2015 at 10:14, Xavier Combelle wrote:
>> +1. The new embeddable Python distribution for Windows is a great step
>> forward for this. It's not single-file, but it's easy to produce a
>> single-directory self-contained application with it. I don't know if
>> there's anything equivalent for
> +1. The new embeddable Python distribution for Windows is a great step
> forward for this. It's not single-file, but it's easy to produce a
> single-directory self-contained application with it. I don't know if
> there's anything equivalent for Linux/OSX - maybe it's something we
> should look at
Op 28 mei 2015 om 21:37 heeft Chris Barker het volgende
geschreven:
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Sturla Molden
> wrote:
>
>> The system
>> Python should be left alone as it is.
>
> absolutely!
>
> By the way, py2app will build an application bundle that depends on the
> system pyt
On 29 May 2015 11:01 am, "Victor Stinner" wrote:
>
> Why not continue to enhance Python 3 instead of wasting our time with
> Python 2? We have limited resources in term of developers to maintain
> Python.
>
> (I'm not talking about fixing *bugs* in Python 2 which is fine with me.)
I'm actually OK
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 6:10 PM Larry Hastings wrote:
> On 05/28/2015 05:58 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>
> Why not continue to enhance Python 3 instead of wasting our time with
> Python 2? We have limited resources in term of developers to maintain
> Python.
>
>
> Uh, guys, you might as well call
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 5:01 PM, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> That said, making a demo of self-contained webapp server in 350-400K is
> definitely on my TODO list (package support for frozen modules is the
> only blocker for that).
It may be worth taking this over to import-...@python.org for more di
YESSS!!!
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Larry Hastings wrote:
> On 05/28/2015 05:58 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>
> Why not continue to enhance Python 3 instead of wasting our time with
> Python 2? We have limited resources in term of developers to maintain
> Python.
>
>
> Uh, guys, you might a
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Victor Stinner
wrote:
> 2015-05-28 18:07 GMT+02:00 Guido van Rossum :
> > This patch could save companies like Dropbox a lot of money. We run a
> ton of
> > Python code in large datacenters, and while we are slow in moving to
> Python
> > 3, we're good at updating
On 05/28/2015 05:58 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
Why not continue to enhance Python 3 instead of wasting our time with
Python 2? We have limited resources in term of developers to maintain
Python.
Uh, guys, you might as well call off the debate. Benjamin already
checked it in.
https://hg.py
2015-05-28 18:07 GMT+02:00 Guido van Rossum :
> This patch could save companies like Dropbox a lot of money. We run a ton of
> Python code in large datacenters, and while we are slow in moving to Python
> 3, we're good at updating to the latest 2.7.
I'm not sure that backporting optimizations woul
Hello,
On Fri, 29 May 2015 08:38:44 +1000
Nick Coghlan wrote:
[]
> In that vein, it might be interesting to see what could be done with
> MicroPython in terms of providing a lightweight portable Python
> runtime without CPython's extensive integration with the underlying
> OS.
Thanks for menti
On 29 May 2015 00:52, "Paul Moore" wrote:
>
> +1. The new embeddable Python distribution for Windows is a great step
> forward for this. It's not single-file, but it's easy to produce a
> single-directory self-contained application with it. I don't know if
> there's anything equivalent for Linux/O
On 28/05/15 21:37, Chris Barker wrote:
I think it's great for it to be used by end users as a system library /
utility. i.e. like you would a the system libc -- so if you can write a
little python script that only uses the stdlib -- you can simply deliver
that script.
No it is not, because som
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Sturla Molden
wrote:
> Many Unix tools need Python, so Mac OS X (like Linux distros and FreeBSD)
> will always need a system Python. Yes, it would be great if could be called
> spython or something else than python. But the main problem is that it is
> used by en
affbde1)
-Original Message-
From: Matthias Klose [mailto:d...@ubuntu.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 5:01 AM
To: Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi; 'python-dev@python.org'
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Computed Goto dispatch for Python 2
On 05/28/2015 02:17 AM, Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi wrote:
Donald Stufft wrote:
> Honestly, I’m on an OS that *does* ship Python (OS X) and part of me hopes
> that they stop shipping it. It’s very rare that someone ships Python as
> part of their OS without modifying it in some way, and those modifications
> almost always cause pain to some set of users
On May 28, 2015 at 2:11:02 PM, Terry Reedy (tjre...@udel.edu) wrote:
> On 5/28/2015 10:55 AM, Steve Dower wrote:
>
> > And it would look like a 20MB+ file just for a simple 1KB Python
> > script...
> >
> > For Windows at least, I'd prefer to have some app-style installer
> > generation (e.g. ht
On 5/28/2015 10:55 AM, Steve Dower wrote:
And it would look like a 20MB+ file just for a simple 1KB Python
script...
For Windows at least, I'd prefer to have some app-style installer
generation (e.g. http://pynsist.readthedocs.org/en/latest/) which,
combined with the embeddable Python distro (n
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:08 AM Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Wow. Such thread. :-)
>
> This patch could save companies like Dropbox a lot of money. We run a ton
> of Python code in large datacenters, and while we are slow in moving to
> Python 3, we're good at updating to the latest 2.7.
>
Dropbox
Donald Stufft wrote:
> I think docker is a pretty crummy answer to Go’s static binaries. What I would
> love is for Python to get:
>
> * The ability to import .so modules via zipzimport (ideally without a
> temporary
> directory, but that might require newer APIs from libc and such).
> * The abil
Wow. Such thread. :-)
This patch could save companies like Dropbox a lot of money. We run a ton
of Python code in large datacenters, and while we are slow in moving to
Python 3, we're good at updating to the latest 2.7.
The patch is forward and backward compatible.I'm strongly in favor.
--
--Gu
On 28/05/2015 15:47, Skip Montanaro wrote:
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
But you could argue that "Special cases aren't special enough to break the
rules" and that's what we are proposing here by claiming Python 2.7 is a
special case and thus we should accept a patch that
On May 28, 2015 at 10:55:08 AM, Steve Dower (steve.do...@microsoft.com) wrote:
> Donald Stufft wrote:
> > I think docker is a pretty crummy answer to Go’s static binaries. What I
> > would
> > love is for Python to get:
> >
> > * The ability to import .so modules via zipzimport (ideally without
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:47 AM Skip Montanaro
wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> > But you could argue that "Special cases aren't special enough to break
> the
> > rules" and that's what we are proposing here by claiming Python 2.7 is a
> > special case and thus we
On 28 May 2015 at 15:37, Donald Stufft wrote:
> I think docker is a pretty crummy answer to Go’s static binaries. What I would
> love is for Python to get:
>
> * The ability to import .so modules via zipzimport (ideally without a
> temporary
> directory, but that might require newer APIs from l
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> But you could argue that "Special cases aren't special enough to break the
> rules" and that's what we are proposing here by claiming Python 2.7 is a
> special case and thus we should accept a patch that is not a one-liner
> change to gain som
On May 28, 2015 at 10:10:03 AM, Nick Coghlan (ncogh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On 28 May 2015 at 21:55, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> >> I'm -1 on the idea because:
> >>
> >> * Performance improvements are not bug fixes
> >> * The patch doesn't make the migration process from Python 2 to Python 3
> >>
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 8:47 AM Raymond Hettinger <
raymond.hettin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 28, 2015, at 1:54 AM, Berker Peksağ
> wrote:
> >
> > * Performance improvements are not bug fixes
>
> Practicality beats purity here.
Recognize that a huge number of Python users will remain in t
On 28 May 2015 at 21:55, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>> I'm -1 on the idea because:
>>
>> * Performance improvements are not bug fixes
>> * The patch doesn't make the migration process from Python 2 to Python 3
>> easier
>
> And this is why people have been porting Python applications to Go.
For f
On 28 May 2015 at 22:00, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 05/28/2015 02:17 AM, Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> This is Vamsi from Server Scripting Languages Optimization team at Intel
>> Corporation.
>>
>> Would like to submit a request to enable the computed goto based dispatch in
>> P
On 28 May 2015 at 23:37, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 28 May 2015 at 22:00, Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 05/28/2015 02:17 AM, Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> This is Vamsi from Server Scripting Languages Optimization team at Intel
>>> Corporation.
>>>
>>> Would like to submit a requ
To: Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi; 'python-dev@python.org'
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Computed Goto dispatch for Python 2
On 05/28/2015 02:17 AM, Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This is Vamsi from Server Scripting Languages Optimization team at Intel
> Corporation.
&
> On May 28, 2015, at 1:54 AM, Berker Peksağ wrote:
>
> * Performance improvements are not bug fixes
Practicality beats purity here.
Recognize that a huge number of Python users will remain in the Python2.7 world
for some time. We have a responsibility to the bulk of our users (my estimate
On 05/28/2015 02:17 AM, Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This is Vamsi from Server Scripting Languages Optimization team at Intel
> Corporation.
>
> Would like to submit a request to enable the computed goto based dispatch in
> Python 2.x (which happens to be enabled by default in Py
> I'm -1 on the idea because:
>
> * Performance improvements are not bug fixes
> * The patch doesn't make the migration process from Python 2 to Python 3
> easier
And this is why people have been porting Python applications to Go.
Maybe addressing Python performance and making Python (2 or 3) a
b
won't this need python compiled with gcc 5.1 to have any effect? Which
compiler version was used for the benchmark?
the issue that negated most computed goto improvements
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39284) was only closed
very recently (r212172, 9f4ec746affbde1)
__
On 28 May 2015 at 19:47, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> That's going to be a negotiation process - companies don't typically
> contribute paid development time to open source projects out of the
> kindness of their hearts, they do it either because they're using the
> project themselves, because of deals t
On 28 May 2015 at 18:54, Berker Peksağ wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:17 AM, Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi
> wrote:
>> Attached is the computed goto patch (along with instructions to run) for
>> Python 2.7.10 (based on the patch submitted by Jeffrey Yasskin at
>> http://bugs.python.org/issue4753)
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:17 AM, Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi
wrote:
> Attached is the computed goto patch (along with instructions to run) for
> Python 2.7.10 (based on the patch submitted by Jeffrey Yasskin at
> http://bugs.python.org/issue4753). We built and tested this patch for Python
> 2.7.10
On 28.05.2015 02:17, Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This is Vamsi from Server Scripting Languages Optimization team at Intel
> Corporation.
>
> Would like to submit a request to enable the computed goto based dispatch in
> Python 2.x (which happens to be enabled by default in Pytho
Why now? We intentionally decided not to do this for 2.7 in the past
because it was too late for the release cutoff.
Has anyone benchmarked compiling python in profile-opt mode vs having the
computed goto patch? I'd *expect* the benefits to be the roughly the same.
Has this been compared to that
On 5/27/2015 9:31 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
+1 from me, for basically the same reasons Guido gives: Python 2.7 is
going to be with us for a long time, and this particular change
shouldn't have any externally visible impacts at either an ABI or API level.
Immediately after a release, giving the p
> On May 27, 2015, at 6:31 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> On 28 May 2015 at 10:17, Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi
> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> This is Vamsi from Server Scripting Languages Optimization team at Intel
> Corporation.
>
>
>
> Would like to submit a request to enable the computed goto
On 28 May 2015 at 10:17, Parasa, Srinivas Vamsi <
srinivas.vamsi.par...@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> This is Vamsi from Server Scripting Languages Optimization team at Intel
> Corporation.
>
>
>
> Would like to submit a request to enable the computed goto based dispatch
> in Python 2.x (wh
49 matches
Mail list logo
