Martin v. Löwis <mar...@v.loewis.de> added the comment: > I would be happy to do a design doc for this and write some of the inner > loops, but if (a) it's already being done or (b) there's no chance of it > being deployed then it would be a waste of time... > if there was definite interest in it (and reasonable schedule > expectations) I could write a lot more of it.
I think the only realistic chance in which something may change is that somebody sits down and does all the work, from beginning to end. I doubt that a design doc and some inner loops alone will make any difference. It's not being done (to my knowledge), for the reason alone that it would be a lot of work. It has a chance to be deployed only if a) it is significantly faster, for small numbers, b) correct, and c) only slightly more complicated than the current code. I notice that such discussion is off-topic for this bug report, which is about your original patch. All we have to decide here is whether to accept it (perhaps with modifications), or to reject it. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue1087418> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
