On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 09:41, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote: > That said, I don't think the size is very important. For any non-trivial > Python application, the size of unicodedata will be negligible compared > to the size of Python objects. That depends very much on the platform and the application. For our embedded use of Python, static data size (like the text segment of a shared object) is far dearer than the heap space used by Python objects, which is why we've had to excise both the UCD and the CJK codecs in our builds. -- Tim Lesher <tlesher at gmail.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