Movatterモバイル変換
[0]ホーム
[Python-Dev] map() methods (was: Re: [Patches] Review (was: Please review before applying))
Vladimir MarangozovVladimir.Marangozov@inrialpes.fr
Tue, 25 Apr 2000 08:13:32 +0200 (CEST)
Hi, I'm back on-line.> [Tim]> > Perhaps the 1.6 source distribution could contain a new "intriguing> > experimental patches" directory? Greg's list-comp and Christian's> > Stackless have enough fans that this would probably be appreciated.> > Perhaps some other things too, if we all run out of time (thinking> > mostly of Vladimir's malloc cleanup and NeilS's gc).I'd be in favor of including gc as an optional (experimental) feature.I'm quite confident that it will evolve into a standard feature, in itscurrent or in an improved state. The overall strategy looks good, butthere are some black spots w.r.t its cost, both in speed and space.Neil reported in private mail something like 5-10% mem increase, butI doubt that the picture is so optimistic. My understanding is thatthese numbers reflect the behavior of the Linux VMM in terms of effectivelyused pages. In terms of absolute, peak requested virtual memory, thingsare probably worse than that. We're still unclear on this...For 1.6, the gc option would be a handy tool for detecting cyclic trash.It will answer some expectations, and I believe we're ready to give somegood feedback on its functioning, its purpose, its limitations, etc.By the time 1.6 is finalized, I expect that we'll know roughly its costin terms of mem overhead. Overall, it would be nice to have it in thedistrib as an experimental feature -- it would both bootstrap some usefulfeedback, and would encourage enthousiasts to look more closely at DSA/GC(DSA - dynamic storage allocation). By 1.7 (with Py3K on the horizon),we would have a good understanding on what to do with gc and how to do it.If I go one step further, what I expect is that the garbage collectorwould be enabled together with a Python-specific memory allocator whichwill compensate the cost introduced by the collector. There will somesome stable state again (in terms of speed and size) similar to what wehave now, but with a bonus pack of additional memory services.> I definitely want Vladimir's patches in -- I feel very guilty for not> having reviewed his latest proposal yet. I expect that it's right on> the mark, but I understand if Vladimir wants to wait with preparing> yet another set of patches until I'm happy with the design...Yes, I'd prefer to wait and get it right. There's some basis, but itneeds careful rethinking again. I'm willing to fit in the 1.6 timelinebut I understand very well that it's a matter of time :-).-- Vladimir MARANGOZOV |Vladimir.Marangozov@inrialpes.frhttp://sirac.inrialpes.fr/~marangoz | tel:(+33-4)76615277 fax:76615252
[8]ページ先頭