On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Moore, Paul wrote: > Hmm. I tend to favour "do it right, then do it fast". If there's a > performance hit on dir(), why can't it be made faster? [snip] > Of course, we *really* want vars() here, as we're otherwise doing work in > dir() to get entries that we then throw away. dir(object) simply doesn't do what we want. I've tried several times to write a correct pickler using dir(object) and have always run into problems due to pathological corner-cases. I encourage you to try your hand at it. In the process I've found another issue with the slots implementation. I'll post the details to python-dev in a separate e-mail. > > Note that it does an unnecessary getattr, hasattr, memory > > allocation and incurs loop overhead on every dict attribute, > > but otherwise it should work once vars is fixed. > > Efficiency again. I'd have to bow to your greater experience here. Although > with pickling, doesn't I/O usually outweigh any performance cost? I can't speak for everyone's applications, but we frequently pickle to memory or to the operating system buffer-cache don't live long enough to hit the disk. Thanks, -Kevin -- Kevin Jacobs The OPAL Group - Enterprise Systems Architect Voice: (216) 986-0710 x 19 E-mail: jacobs@theopalgroup.com Fax: (216) 986-0714 WWW: http://www.theopalgroup.com
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