Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> writes: > But is the startup time of apps that use a lot of stuff the most > important thing? I'd say that the startup time of apps that *don't* > use a lot of stuff is more important. I'm not sure that making the > binary bigger doesn't slow it down. I'm pretty sure that it doesn't. On Unix, the system performs a copy-on-write mmap of the executable. No disk access is done until page faults trigger a disk read. I believe Windows uses a similar mechanism. The size of the executable is irrelevant (if you have no relocations); only the part of the executable that is used matters. On the other hand, on my Linux installation, importing a module costs 35 system calls if the module is not found, and no PYTHONPATH is set; every directory in PYTHONPATH adds four additional system calls. > Yes, please. We switched to building almost all extensions as shared > libs when we switched away from Modules/Setup to setup.py. For modules that require configuration, this was a good thing - now setup.py will autoconfigure them. For modules that require no additional libraries, I hope that this decision will be reverted some day. Regards, Martin
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