Thanks for the helpful feedback. I'll review and submit an updated patch this weekend. On Apr 3, 2013, at 8:26 PM, ezio.melotti@gmail.com wrote:

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst File Doc/library/profile.rst (left):

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst#oldcode... Doc/library/profile.rst:10: :synopsis: Python source profiler. Why have you removed these?

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst File Doc/library/profile.rst (right):

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst#newcode... Doc/library/profile.rst:8: :source:`Modules/_lsprof.c` and :source:`Lib/pstats.py` :source:`Lib/cProfile.py` and :source:`Modules/_lsprof.c` shouldn't be included IMHO.

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst#newcode... Doc/library/profile.rst:63: cProfile.run('foo(x)') Why this change? It seems easier to me to say that if you want to profile the function foo you can call .run('foo()').

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst#newcode... Doc/library/profile.rst:77: 43/3 0.533 0.012 0.749 0.250 pobject.py:99(evaluate) I think it would be even better to use a real-world example that users can run (maybe you can thing about something better than re.compile), e.g.:

...

...

...

import cProfile import re cProfile.run('re.compile("foo|bar")') 197 function calls (192 primitive calls) in 0.002 seconds

Ordered by: standard name

ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function) 1 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 <string>:1(<module>) 1 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 re.py:212(compile) 1 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 re.py:268(_compile) 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 sre_compile.py:172(_compile_charset) 1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 sre_compile.py:201(_optimize_charset) 4 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 sre_compile.py:25(_identityfunction) 3/1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 sre_compile.py:33(_compile)

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst#newcode... Doc/library/profile.rst:104: provides the respective data of each function The end of lines are inconsistent. You can remove the trailing commas and full stop.

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst#newcode... Doc/library/profile.rst:280: Profile the cmd via :func:`exec` with the specified global and local environment. Line too long (there are a few others that are longer than 80 chars too).

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst#newcode... Doc/library/profile.rst:397: +------------------+----------------------+ Here you could use the simpler table syntax: ====== ====== header header ====== ====== row1 row1 row2 row2 ... ... ====== ======

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst#newcode... Doc/library/profile.rst:418: .. For compatibility with the old profiler, s/,/./

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst#newcode... Doc/library/profile.rst:447: printed; as of Python 1.5b1, this uses the Perl-style regular This can probably be removed.

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/diff/7348/Doc/library/profile.rst#newcode... Doc/library/profile.rst:618: interpreted differently: This could point to the different times available in the time module, and possibly provide some suggestion.

http://bugs.python.org/review/6696/