2016-01-16 12:06 GMT+01:00 Petr Viktorin<encukou@gmail.com>:
The PEP is designed optimizers. It would be good to stick to that use case, at least as far as the registration is concerned. I suggest noting in the documentation that Python semantics*must* be preserved, and renaming the API, e.g.::
sys.set_global_optimizers([])
On 17 January 2016 at 21:48, Victor Stinner<victor.stinner@gmail.com> wrote:
I would prefer to not restrict the PEP to a specific usage.
On 2016-01-17 7:36 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
The problem I see with making the documentation and naming too generic is that people won't know what the feature is useful for - a generic term like "transformer" accurately describes these units of code, but provides no hint as to why a developer might care about their existence.
However, if the reason we're adding the capability is to make global static optimizers feasible, then we cam describe it accordingly (so the answer to "Why does this feature exist?" becomes relatively self evident), and have the fact that the feature can actually be used for arbitrary transforms be an added bonus rather than the core intent.
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016, at 11:45, Yury Selivanov wrote:
+1.
I think that it depends on how it's implemented. Having a _requirement_ that semantics _must_ be preserved suggests that they may not always be applied, or may not be applied in a deterministic order.