Message364469
| Author | larry |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Mark.Shannon, eric.snow, jeremy.kloth, jkloth, larry, maciej.szulik, nanjekyejoannah, ncoghlan, phsilva, rhettinger, shihai1991, vstinner |
| Date | 2020-03-17.18:17:23 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1584469043.32.0.622554823246.issue39511@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> The problem with having a single immortal `None`, is that it will > cause data cache thrashing as two different CPUs modify the > refcount on the shared `None` object. That's a very reasonable theory. Personally, I find modern CPU architecture bewildering and unpredictable. So I'd prefer it if somebody tests such performance claims, rather than simply asserting them and having that be the final design. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2020-03-17 18:17:23 | larry | set | recipients: + larry, rhettinger, ncoghlan, vstinner, jkloth, phsilva, jeremy.kloth, Mark.Shannon, eric.snow, maciej.szulik, nanjekyejoannah, shihai1991 |
| 2020-03-17 18:17:23 | larry | set | messageid: <1584469043.32.0.622554823246.issue39511@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| 2020-03-17 18:17:23 | larry | link | issue39511 messages |
| 2020-03-17 18:17:23 | larry | create | |