>From my curious user viewpoint ... "Michael Hudson" <mwh@python.net> wrote in message news:2m65ouahg6.fsf@starship.python.net... > Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> writes: > > > [Tim] > >> > The benchmarking suite should also be checked in, and should be > >> > very welcome. Perhaps it's time for a "benchmark" subdirectory > >> > under Lib/test? It doesn't make much sense even now that pystone > >> > and sortperf live directly in the test directory. + 1 on a separate subdirectory (there are two other already) to make these easier to find (or ignore). > >> Works for me. Can we perhaps decide whether we want to do this in the > >> near future? I am going to be writing up module docs for the test package > >> and if we are going to end up moving them I would like to be get this > >> written into the docs the first time through. + 1 on doing so by 2.3 final if not before > > Should the benchmarks directory be part of the distribution, or should > > it be in the nondist part of the CVS tree? > > I can't think why you'd want it in nondist, unless they depend on huge > input files or something. + 1 on keeping these with the standard distribution. Sortperf.py is a great example of random + systematic corner case testing extended to something more complicated than binary ops. Besides that, I expect to actually use it, with minor mods, sometime later this year. I am more than happy to give it the 4K bytes it uses. Terry J. Reedy
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4