[Python-Dev] Re: list comprehensions / garbage collection / optional features

[Greg Wilson]

> >Greg Ward wrote:

> >idea; all of a sudden, it's no longer enough to say, "You need Python
> >1.6" to run this script/use this module, now you need to say, "You need
> >Python 1.6 built with list comprehensions".  Ugh.

> Andrew Kuchling wrote:

> The same argument applies to --with-gc, though, since people might
> write code that creates cycles and needs GC to run without leaking
> like a sieve.  Making GC optional is still the right solution, though,
> because its performance effects are still unknown and might be costly.

Greg Wilson writes:

I'm really looking forward to recycling my rusty SETL idioms when list
comprehensions become part of the "official" release, and to creating
graphs in the obvious way if GC ever becomes standard.  However, the more
variations there are in the "standard" (as opposed to "developer")
release, the more expensive (in time and sweat) it is to manage Python at
large sites (like Los Alamos).  This in turn makes it harder to persuade
people that using Python will make their lives easier...

Thanks,

Greg

Footnote: The existence of JPython was one of the arguments in favor of
choosing Python for the Software Carpentry project. The fact that JPython
and CPython have very different memory management behaviors almost negated
that point: as one thirty-year veteran said, "It's no use having code that
runs in lots of places if it runs differently in each."