Greg> have you run any generic benchmarks such as pystone to get a
Greg> better idea of what the net effect on "typical" python code is?
MAL's pybench would probably be better for this presuming it does some
addition with string operands.
Skip
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Greg> have you run any generic benchmarks such as pystone to get a
> Greg> better idea of what the net effect on "typical" python code is?
>
> MAL's pybench would probably be better for this presuming it does some
> addition with string operands.
or stringbench
Gregory P. Smith wrote:
>> I've never liked the "".join([]) idiom for string concatenation; in my
>> opinion it violates the principles "Beautiful is better than ugly." and
>> "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.".
>> (And perhaps several others.) To that end I
Ron Adam wrote:
> I think what may be missing is a larger set of higher level string functions
> that will work with lists of strings directly. Then lists of strings can be
> thought of as a mutable string type by its use, and then working with
> substrings
> in lists and using ''.join() will
I was looking at the logs for classobject.c and noticed this commit
that adds Py_TPFLAGS_HAVE_WEAKREFS to the instance type. Should it be
backported to 2.4? (It looks to me like it should, but I don't know
anything about weakref implementation and want to get approval from
someone who knows.)
--
No need to backport. Py_TPFLAGS_DEFAULT implies
Py_TPFLAGS_HAVE_WEAKREFS.
The change was for clarity -- most things that have the weakref slots
filled-in will also make the flag explicit -- that makes it easier on
the brain when verifying code that checks the weakref flag.
Raymond
-Ori
Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ron Adam wrote:
>
> > I think what may be missing is a larger set of higher level string
> > functions
> > that will work with lists of strings directly. Then lists of strings can
> > be
> > thought of as a mutable string type by its use, and the
On Fri, Oct 06, 2006 at 08:48:15AM -0700, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> The change was for clarity -- most things that have the weakref slots
> filled-in will also make the flag explicit -- that makes it easier on
> the brain when verifying code that checks the weakref flag.
OK; I won't backport this
On 10/6/06, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ron Adam wrote:
>
> > I think what may be missing is a larger set of higher level string functions
> > that will work with lists of strings directly. Then lists of strings can be
> > thought of as a mutable string type by its use, and then wor
Josiah Carlson wrote:
> Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Ron Adam wrote:
>>
>>> I think what may be missing is a larger set of higher level string
>>> functions
>>> that will work with lists of strings directly. Then lists of strings can
>>> be
>>> thought of as a mutable string typ
On 6 Oct 2006, at 12:37, Ron Adam wrote:
>>> I've never liked the "".join([]) idiom for string concatenation;
>>> in my
>>> opinion it violates the principles "Beautiful is better than
>>> ugly." and
>>> "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to
>>> do it.".
...
> Well
Patch / Bug Summary
___
Patches : 428 open ( +6) / 3417 closed ( +2) / 3845 total ( +8)
Bugs: 939 open ( +6) / 6229 closed (+17) / 7168 total (+23)
RFE : 240 open ( +3) / 239 closed ( +0) / 479 total ( +3)
New / Reopened Patches
__
Speed up
Nicko van Someren wrote:
> On 6 Oct 2006, at 12:37, Ron Adam wrote:
>
I've never liked the "".join([]) idiom for string concatenation; in my
opinion it violates the principles "Beautiful is better than ugly." and
"There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do
>>
13 matches
Mail list logo
