[Python-Dev] IO implementation: in C and Python? (original) (raw)

Brett Cannon brett at python.org
Fri Feb 20 06:49:27 CET 2009

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 21:35, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> wrote:

Guido van Rossum wrote:

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 19:41, Benjamin Peterson <benjamin at python.org> wrote:

As we prepare to merge the io-c branch, the question has come up [1] about the original Python implementation. Should it just be deleted in favor C version? The wish to maintain the two implementations together has been raised on the basis that Python is easier to experiment on and read (for other vm implementors). Probably not a surprise, but +1 from me for keeping the pure Python version around for the benefit of other VMs as well as a reference implementation. You have been practice channeling me again, haven't you? I like the idea of having two (closely matching) implementations very much. In 2.x we did this on an ad-hoc basis, e.g. [c]StringIO, pickle/cPickle, heapq/heapq. In 3.0 we've moved towards standardizing the approach -- the foo.py file first defines everything and then tries to import * from foo on top of that. Currently, if I want to verify that (say) cFoo and Foo do the same thing, or compare their speed, it's easy because I can import the modules separately. Given the 3.0 approach, how would one access the Python versions without black magic or hacks?

As of right now there is no standard practice, although coming up with a standard way of handling this would probably be a good thing as this will also help with the testing story.

-Brett -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20090219/078d6d86/attachment.htm>

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list