What do we know for sure?
At the start of any experimental project I think it is a good idea to catalog what it is that we know for sure. This is a "dangerous" list because mistakes here might close off promising avenues. Still, here is what I think we can say for sure about minimalPython/psyco: 1. It is clearly possible to generate code using a git that will execute faster than the equivalent code in the C interpreter. 2. Some kinds of code can be generated without knowing the types of _any_ operands. At least part of the flow of control code falls under this heading. Therefore, it _might_ be possible to move some of what psyco does to "compile" time. 3. Python is a dynamic language. Therefore, a big challenge is to know when to use already compiled code. Does anyone have anything they would like to add to this list? Does anyone dispute what I have said? Any corrections would be most helpful. Thanks, Edward -------------------------------------------------------------------- Edward K. Ream email: edream@tds.net Leo: Literate Editor with Outlines Leo: http://personalpages.tds.net/~edream/front.html --------------------------------------------------------------------
I have a fear that we are going to love this project to death if we don't settle on how not to overwhelm the core people with pet ideas, well meant advice, musings, and war stories, etc. (of which I have my share, that I have to restrain myself not to contribute ;-) I'm wondering if it might not be good to have a private list for the core developers that could be cc:'d with only stuff that actually supplies something they specifically asked for, so when time is short they don't have to sift through so much to find what might be directly helpful in what they are actually doing on the project. E.g., what I visualize is a core person asking for something specific, like help with a bug, or help googling to find something specific, or concrete proposals for improving an algorithm, or entity representation, or re-implementing a C module in restricted Python, etc, etc. The key thing would be to have a way for responders to say to themselves, "I don't have a real solution, but my similar experience might be helpful, so I'll post in the general list, but not the core list." Then discussion can churn and occasionally emit a gem, but the core list would only get cc:'d with the really useful stuff. If the core people's original request is cc:'d to the core list, it would become a good archive reflecting progress in a focused way, without foregoing the benefits of freer discussion and banter on the main list. I think it could work on the honor system, so long as the rules are clear, since there would still be the more open outlet, but you could block people if necessary. BTW, I am never sure who would like to be CC:'d personally and who is satisfied to read the list or newsgroup. I would like some guidelines on that, to avoid unnecessary redundancies. I don't think the project would die from mailing list dilution, but I could see core people deciding to withdraw in order to make progress, and that would seem a shame, if there can be a way for us all to help without being more bother than its worth. HTH ;-) Regards, Bengt Richter
Bengt Richter wrote:
I have a fear that we are going to love this project to death if we don't settle on how not to overwhelm the core people with pet ideas, well meant advice, musings, and war stories, etc. (of which I have my share, that I have to restrain myself not to contribute ;-)
Oh, thank you for your concern, but I don't share it. The quality of submissions to this list is not much lower than python-dev. (and it will increase when I stop posting so much :-) python-dev never needed an extra outlet, so we are fine.
I'm wondering if it might not be good to have a private list for the core developers that could be cc:'d with only stuff that actually supplies something they specifically asked for, so when time is short they don't have to sift through so much to find what might be directly helpful in what they are actually doing on the project.
Well, I use private emails to discuss certain things which I desparately need to know. The list gives very good input, and I appreciate it very much. But it will have a hard time to distract me from things which I'm confident about, since I'm not thinking of this stuff since yesterday. [...]
Then discussion can churn and occasionally emit a gem, but the core list would only get cc:'d with the really useful stuff. If the core people's original request is cc:'d to the core list, it would become a good archive reflecting progress in a focused way, without foregoing the benefits of freer discussion and banter on the main list.
What I would like more is what Rocco suggested: Let's have a decent person who is willing to put together the relevant extract of this list and who posts this weekly. I found this very valuable for python-dev, since its posting frequency turned very high, recently.
BTW, I am never sure who would like to be CC:'d personally and who is satisfied to read the list or newsgroup. I would like some guidelines on that, to avoid unnecessary redundancies.
I always do a "reply all", because I think it is not so hard to drop an unwanted duplicate message. Personally, I like to have the duplicate, as a not that I was included in a CC, meaning that I'm supposed to reply. One thing that I have to live with is, that some people still use SPAM obfuscated email addresses which is a PITA.
I don't think the project would die from mailing list dilution, but I could see core people deciding to withdraw in order to make progress, and that would seem a shame, if there can be a way for us all to help without being more bother than its worth.
While I don't see such a danger, I'm very happy that you are concerned that much about the progress of this project, and I assure you I will try to help it as much as I can, regardless of the SNR* of this list (which is good, IMHO). In other words: No way to get rid of me :-) ciao - chris (*) Signal to Noise Ratio -- Christian Tismer :^) <mailto:tismer@tismer.com> Mission Impossible 5oftware : Have a break! Take a ride on Python's Johannes-Niemeyer-Weg 9a : *Starship* http://starship.python.net/ 14109 Berlin : PGP key -> http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/ work +49 30 89 09 53 34 home +49 30 802 86 56 pager +49 173 24 18 776 PGP 0x57F3BF04 9064 F4E1 D754 C2FF 1619 305B C09C 5A3B 57F3 BF04 whom do you want to sponsor today? http://www.stackless.com/
participants (3)
-
Bengt Richter -
Christian Tismer -
Edward K. Ream