Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2001-November/018386.html below:

Program very slow to finish

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] RE: Program very slow to finish
• Next message: [Python-Dev] RE: Program very slow to finish
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Tim Peters wrote:

>Umm, OK, PyObject_DEL() ... is a macro ... which redirects to
>PyObject_FREE() ... which is a macro ... which redirects to
>PyCore_OBJECT_FREE() ... which is a macro ... which redirects to
>PyCore_OBJECT_FREE_FUNC() ... which is a macro ... which redirects to
>_PyCore_ObjectFree (WITH_PYMALLOC) or PyCore_FREE_FUNC (without).
>PyCore_FREE_FUNC is a macro ... which redirects to free().  And
>_PyCore_ObjectFree ... doesn't exist.  I must have missed an #undef in there
>somewhere ...  (-- etc ad nauseam)

>Big Hammer?  Change every one of the existing guys to resolve to malloc()
>and free().  Then declare them all obsolete, define a much smaller new set
>of names, edit the core to use the new guys, and non-core modules get stuck
>with malloc/free until they're rewritten too.  It sucks, but we'd be in
>better shape today if that *had* been done the last time this got reworked.

+1, with the option of using a bigger hammer

	/Paul

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] RE: Program very slow to finish
• Next message: [Python-Dev] RE: Program very slow to finish
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

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