"SP" == Samuele Pedroni <pedronis@bluewin.ch> writes:
SP> But it is clear that the complexity and overhead of (1) and (2), SP> and the space-demand for the caches depend on how much SP> homogeneous are system object layouts and behaviors. Good point! It's important to try to extract the general principles at work and see how they can be applied systematically. The general notion I have is that dictionaries are not an efficient way to implement namespaces. The way most namespaces are used -- in particular that most names are known statically -- allows a more efficient implement. SP> And Python with modules, data-objects, class/instances, types SP> etc is quite a zoo :(. And, again, this is a problem. The same sorts of techniques apply to all namespaces. It would be good to try to make the approach general, but some namespaces are more dynamic than others. Python's classes, lack of declarations, and separate compilation of modules means class/instance namespaces are hard to do right. Need to defer a lot of final decisions to runtime and keep an extra dictionary around just in case. SP> Pushing the class/type unification further, this is an aspect to SP> consider IMHO. SP> If those things where already all known sorry for the boring SP> post. Thanks for good questions and suggestions. Too bad you can't come to dev day. I'll try to post slides before or after the talk -- and update the PEP. Jermey