[Python-Dev] Tweak to PEP 523 for storing a tuple in co_extra
Yury Selivanov
yselivanov.ml at gmail.com
Sat Sep 3 20:45:19 EDT 2016
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Sat Sep 3 20:45:19 EDT 2016
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Tweak to PEP 523 for storing a tuple in co_extra
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Tweak to PEP 523 for storing a tuple in co_extra
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> > But without that new API (basically what Christian proposed) you'd > need > to iterate over the list in order to find the object that belongs to > Pyjion. > > > Yes. Yeah, which means the same for my opcode patch... Which unfortunately will make things slower :( > If we manage to implement my opcode caching idea, we'll have at > least two known users of co_extra. Without a way to claim a > particular > index in co_extra you will have some overhead to locate your objects. > > > Two things. One, I would want any new API to start with an underscore > so people know we can and will change its semantics as necessary. Two, > Guido would have to re-accept the PEP as this is a shift in the use of > the field if this is how people want to go. Since this isn't a user-facing/public API feature, are we *really* forced to accept/implement the PEP before the beta? I'd be happy to spend some time tomorrow/Monday to hammer out an alternative approach to co_extra. Let's see if we can find a slightly better approach. Yury
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Tweak to PEP 523 for storing a tuple in co_extra
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Tweak to PEP 523 for storing a tuple in co_extra
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list