On 23 May 2014 06:27, "Ned Batchelder" <ned@nedbatchelder.com> wrote:
On 5/22/14 2:57 PM, Eric Snow wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com>
wrote:
Same here. More concretely:
...
Having said that, revamping those options and our current optimization mechanism is a far cry from just adding -X nopeephole as Ned has implied. While the former may make sense on its own, those broader changes may languish as nice-to-haves. It may be better to go with the latter in the short-term while the broader changes swirl in the maelstrom of discussion indefinitely.
I get distracted (by work...) for the afternoon, and things take an unexpected turn!
I definitely did not mean to throw open the floodgates to reconsider the entire -O switch. I agree that the -O switch seems like too much UI for too little change in results, and I think a different set of settings and defaults makes more sense. But I do not suppose that we have much appetite to take on that large a change.
For my purposes, an environment variable and no change or addition to the switches would be fine.
Given how far away 3.5 is, I'd actually be interested in seeing a full write-up of Eric's proposal, comparing it to the "let's just add some more technical debt to the pile" -X option based approach. I don't think *anyone* really likes the current state of the optimisation flags, so if this proposal tips us over the edge into finally fixing them properly, huzzah! Cheers, Nick.
--Ned
-eric
_______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/