(original) (raw)

Alex

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 6:14 PM, R. David Murray <rdmurray@bitdance.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 17:40:13 +0200, Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall@gmail.com> wrote:

>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:

>> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:20 PM, senthil.kumaran

>> > <python-checkins@python.org> wrote:

>> >> .TP

>> >> +.BI "\-X " option

>> >> +Set implementation specific option.

>> >

>> >

>> > Should probably be "Set the implementation-specific option."

>>

>> Is there anyone respecting this notation? (I know pypy does not, it

>> uses --jit and stuff)

>

> CPython does. We introduced it for ourselves, it is up to other

> implementations whether or not to use it, or use something else.

>

> --David

you mean "CPython does not have any implementation-specific options"?
I would claim -O behavior should be implementation-specific since it's
nonsense in the optimizations sense, but other than that, it does not
seem that there is any -X options?

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Python-checkins mailing list
Python-checkins@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-checkins

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
"The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero