On Tue, 02 Apr 2013 11:58:11 +0100, Steve Simmons wrote: > It seems to me that jmf *might* be moving towards a vindicated position. > There is some interest now in duplicating, understanding and > (hopefully!) extending his test results, which can only be a Good Thing > - whatever the outcome and wherever the facepalm might land.
Some interest "now"? Oh please. http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2012-September/629810.html Mark Lawrence even created a bug report to track this, also back in September. http://bugs.python.org/issue16061 I'm sure you didn't intend to be insulting, but some of us *have* taken JMF seriously, at least at first. His repeated overblown claims of how Python is destroying Unicode, his lack of acknowledgement that other people have seen string handling *speed up* not slow down, and his refusal to assist in diagnosing this performance regression except to repeatedly quote the same artificial micro-benchmarks over and over again have lost him whatever credibility he started with. This feature is a *memory optimization*, not a speed optimization, and yet as a side-effect of saving memory, it also saves time. Real-world benchmarks of actual applications demonstrate this. One or two trivial slowdowns of artificial micro-benchmarks simply are not important, even if they are genuine. I believe they are genuine, but likely operating system and hardware dependent. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
