On 2013-09-06, at 19:05 , Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Fri, 06 Sep 2013 18:14:26 +0200 > Jesus Cea <jcea at jcea.es> wrote: >> >>> Right now, I agree with Charles-François: your patch is too >>> intrusive. >> >> It is intrusive. Yes. I think it must be, by its own nature. Probably >> room for improvement and code transparency. But... are Python-DEVs >> interested in the project?. That is the point :) > > Well, I'm not *personally* interested in anything that only addresses > Solaris, OS X and the like :) For what it's worth, there's also a linux port and oracle's distro has dtrace support. > And, no, it doesn't have to be *that* intrusive. Take a look at Dave > Malcolm's systemtap patch, which IIRC takes a much more sensible > approach. Is there a possibility of compatibility there, using the same placeholders for a --with-dtrace and --with-systemtap build? Jesus seems to instrument more points than Dave, but the extra points could just be defined to nothing in the systemtap implementation.
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