[Python-Dev] IO implementation: in C and Python?

[Brett Cannon]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 21:35, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> wrote:

> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 19:41, Benjamin Peterson <benjamin at python.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As we prepare to merge the io-c branch, the question has come up [1]
>>>> about the original Python implementation. Should it just be deleted in
>>>> favor C version? The wish to maintain the two implementations together
>>>> has been raised on the basis that Python is easier to experiment on
>>>> and read (for other vm implementors).
>>>>
>>> Probably not a surprise, but +1 from me for keeping the pure Python
>>> version
>>> around for the benefit of other VMs as well as a reference
>>> implementation.
>>>
>>
>> You have been practice channeling me again, haven't you? I like the
>> idea of having two (closely matching) implementations very much. In
>> 2.x we did this on an ad-hoc basis, e.g. [c]StringIO, pickle/cPickle,
>> heapq/_heapq. In 3.0 we've moved towards standardizing the approach --
>> the foo.py file first defines everything and then tries to import *
>> from _foo on top of that.
>>
>
>
> Currently, if I want to verify that (say) cFoo and Foo do the same thing,
> or compare their speed, it's easy because I can import the modules
> separately. Given the 3.0 approach, how would one access the Python versions
> without black magic or hacks?


As of right now there is no standard practice, although coming up with a
standard way of handling this would probably be a good thing as this will
also help with the testing story.

-Brett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20090219/078d6d86/attachment.htm>