RetroSearch Browse

Wed Apr 13 00:34:42 CEST 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-April/110657.html

2011/4/12 Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net>:
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 23:59:53 +0200
> brett.cannon <python-checkins at python.org> wrote:
>> Technical details of
>> +the VM providing the accelerated code are allowed to differ as
>> +necessary, e.g., a class being a ``type`` when implemented in C.
>
> I don't understand what this means ("a class being a ``type`` when
> implemented in C").
>
>> +If this test were to provide 100% branch coverage for
>> +``heapq.heappop()`` in the pure Python implementation then the
>> +accelerated C code would be allowed to be added to CPython's standard
>> +library. If it did not, then the test suite would need to be updated
>> +until 100% branch coverage was provided before the accelerated C code
>> +could be added.
>
> I really think that's a too strong requirement. We don't want to
> paralyze development until the stdlib gets 100% coverage in the tests
> suite.

Presumably this only applies to new code, though, which I would hope
would have comprehensive test coverage regardless of this PEP.

-- 
Regards,
Benjamin

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-April/110657.html below:

Update PEP 399 to include comments from python-dev.