[Python-Dev] Re: [Python-checkins] python/nondist/peps pep-0329.txt, 1.2, 1.3 (original) (raw)
Phillip J. Eby pje at telecommunity.com
Tue Apr 20 12:16:01 EDT 2004
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: [Python-checkins] python/nondist/peps pep-0329.txt, 1.2, 1.3
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Re: [Python-checkins] python/nondist/peps pep-0329.txt, 1.2, 1.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
At 08:31 AM 4/20/04 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Adopt Jack Diederich's suggested module name.
I think pragma.py is a poor name for this, because (a) pragma is a candidate keyword (it has keyword status in most languages that have it) and (b) the word pragma implies compiler directives of any kind, not just the specific function proposed in this PEP. Also, a heads up: unless this PEP gets a lot more support from folks whose first name isn't Raymond, I'm going to reject it.
Would it be salvageable if it were changed to:
Get rid of bytecode hacking, in favor of a change to the compiler
Optimize builtins only, and only those that are never assigned to by the module
use a future statement to enable the behavior initially, before making it the default in a future release
have module.setattr warn when shadowing a previously unshadowed builtin (unless the module uses the future statement, in which case it's an error)
Would this be acceptable? It seems to me that this approach would allow Jython and IronPython the option in future of replacing lookups of builtins with static field accesses and/or method calls, which would give them quite a potential performance boost.
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: [Python-checkins] python/nondist/peps pep-0329.txt, 1.2, 1.3
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Re: [Python-checkins] python/nondist/peps pep-0329.txt, 1.2, 1.3
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]