On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 12:07:00PM +0100, Charlie Clark wrote:
Am 10.11.2010, 01:40 Uhr, schrieb Brian Sutherland
br...@vanguardistas.net:
On the micro benchmarks, the only difference I see is a memory
improvement which I think will not survive in practice because most
... ?
Er,
Am 10.11.2010, 01:40 Uhr, schrieb Brian Sutherland
br...@vanguardistas.net:
On the micro benchmarks, the only difference I see is a memory
improvement which I think will not survive in practice because most
... ?
Er, somehow my thoughts didn't make it into text:
attributes are
Am 08.11.2010, 15:35 Uhr, schrieb Brian Sutherland
br...@vanguardistas.net:
If no-one replies, I'll assume that 3% is just not enough to be
interesting and do nothing;)
Hi Brian,
thanks for sharing this but it looks to me like a micro-optimisation that
isn't really worth going against
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 01:21:00AM +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 03:35:09PM +0100, Brian Sutherland wrote:
I've committed 2 patches to a jinty-mem branch of zope.interface.
Together these patches reduce the startup memory use of my ZTK based
application by 3%. Is
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 03:49:38PM +0100, Charlie Clark wrote:
Am 08.11.2010, 15:35 Uhr, schrieb Brian Sutherland
br...@vanguardistas.net:
If no-one replies, I'll assume that 3% is just not enough to be
interesting and do nothing;)
Hi Brian,
thanks for sharing this but it looks to
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 05:04:11PM +0100, Brian Sutherland wrote:
Might be worth timing a slots-based implementation.
I just tried to add slots to Element, Attribute and Method classes, but
it there's too many tests that break to benchmark it running the ZTK
tests.
On the micro
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 12:14:54AM +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 05:04:11PM +0100, Brian Sutherland wrote:
Might be worth timing a slots-based implementation.
I just tried to add slots to Element, Attribute and Method classes, but
it there's too many tests that
I've committed 2 patches to a jinty-mem branch of zope.interface.
Together these patches reduce the startup memory use of my ZTK based
application by 3%. Is that enough to justify their risk/complexity?
https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/checkins/2010-November/052516.html
Hi.
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Brian Sutherland
br...@vanguardistas.net wrote:
I've committed 2 patches to a jinty-mem branch of zope.interface.
Together these patches reduce the startup memory use of my ZTK based
application by 3%. Is that enough to justify their risk/complexity?
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 03:35:09PM +0100, Brian Sutherland wrote:
I've committed 2 patches to a jinty-mem branch of zope.interface.
Together these patches reduce the startup memory use of my ZTK based
application by 3%. Is that enough to justify their risk/complexity?
On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 01:21 +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 03:35:09PM +0100, Brian Sutherland wrote:
I've committed 2 patches to a jinty-mem branch of zope.interface.
Together these patches reduce the startup memory use of my ZTK based
application by 3%. Is that
11 matches
Mail list logo
