RetroSearch Browse

Tue Feb 28 12:20:19 CET 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-February/117036.html

On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 10:02:46 +0100
"Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> 
> On the contrary, I'd expect that the build time using 2to3 is
> significantly shorter than the test suite run times, *in particular*
> for large projects. For example, for Django, 2to3 takes less than
> 3 minutes (IIRC), and the test suite runs an hour or so (depending
> on how many tests get skipped).

In the end, that's not particularly relevant, because you don't have to
run the test suite entirely; when working on small changes, you usually
re-run the impacted parts of the test suite until everything goes fine;
on the other hand, 2to3 *has* to run on the entire code base.

So, really, it's a couple of seconds to run a single bunch of tests vs.
several minutes to run 2to3 on the code base.
And it's not just the test suite: every concrete experiment with the
library you're porting has a serial dependency on running 2to3.

Regards

Antoine.

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-February/117036.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 414 - Unicode Literals for Python 3