A RetroSearch Logo

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

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-February/086248.html below:

[Python-Dev] IO implementation: in C and Python?

[Python-Dev] IO implementation: in C and Python? [Python-Dev] IO implementation: in C and Python?rdmurray at bitdance.com rdmurray at bitdance.com
Fri Feb 20 05:27:56 CET 2009
On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 at 21:41, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> As we prepare to merge the io-c branch, the question has come up [1]
> about the original Python implementation. Should it just be deleted in
> favor C version? The wish to maintain the two implementations together
> has been raised on the basis that Python is easier to experiment on
> and read (for other vm implementors).

I'm personally +0 on this, but I note that it is easier to read not
just for other vm implementors, but for users.  Witness the question
about the behavior of 'for' vs 'readline'.  I'd have had a much
harder time figuring out the behavior if I'd had to read the C code.

That said, I'm not personally sure if maintaining both versions is
worth it.  Real python developers should make that decision :)

--RDM
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

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