- rearranged a bit to avoid duplicated information
- provide more complete (and hopefully less confusing) descriptions of
the return values for most of these functions
(close SF bug #563298)
* Add comment on the future of the sets module.
* Change a variable from "input" to "data" to avoid shadowing a builtin.
* Added possible applications for str.rsplit() and itertools.tee().
* Repaired the example for sorted().
* Cleaned-up the example for operator.itemgetter().
patch removes dependencies on the old unsupported KoreanCodecs package
and the alternative JapaneseCodecs package. Since both of those
provide aliases for their codecs, this removal just makes the generic
codec names work.
We needed to make slight changes to __init__() as well.
This will be backported to Python 2.3 when its branch freeze is over.
The special-case code that was removed could return a value indicating
success but leave an exception set. test_fileinput failed in a debug
build as a result.
semantics to include subtypes. Most concrete object APIs then had
a Py<type>_CheckExact() macro added to test for an object's type
not including subtypes.
The PyDict_CheckExact() macro wasn't created at that time, so I've added
it for API completeness/symmetry - even though nobody has complained
about its absence in the time since 2.2 was released.
Not a backport candidate.
semantics to include subtypes. Most concrete object APIs then had
a Py<type>_CheckExact() macro added to test for an object's type
not including subtypes.
The PyDict_CheckExact() macro wasn't created at that time, so I've added
it for API completeness/symmetry - even though nobody has complained
about its absence in the time since 2.2 was released.
Not a backport candidate.
with most other concrete object checks, but the docs weren't brought into
line.
PyList_CheckExact() was added at 2.2 but never documented.
backport candidate.
with most other concrete object checks, but the docs weren't brought into
line.
PyList_CheckExact() was added at 2.2 but never documented.
backport candidate.
which can be reviewed via
http://coding.derkeiler.com/Archive/Python/comp.lang.python/2003-12/1011.html
Duncan Booth investigated, and discovered that an "optimisation" was
in fact a pessimisation for small numbers of elements in a source list,
compared to not having the optimisation, although with large numbers
of elements in the source list the optimisation was quite beneficial.
He posted his change to comp.lang.python (but not to SF).
Further research has confirmed his assessment that the optimisation only
becomes a net win when the source list has more than 100 elements.
I also found that the optimisation could apply to tuples as well,
but the gains only arrive with source tuples larger than about 320
elements and are nowhere near as significant as the gains with lists,
(~95% gain @ 10000 elements for lists, ~20% gain @ 10000 elements for
tuples) so I haven't proceeded with this.
The code as it was applied the optimisation to list subclasses as
well, and this also appears to be a net loss for all reasonable sized
sources (~80-100% for up to 100 elements, ~20% for more than 500
elements; I tested up to 10000 elements).
Duncan also suggested special casing empty lists, which I've extended
to all empty sequences.
On the basis that list_fill() is only ever called with a list for the
result argument, testing for the source being the destination has
now happens before testing source types.
Fred Drake
Raymond Hettinger
Guido van Rossum
Barry Warsaw
Martin v. Löwis
Hye-Shik Chang
Andrew MacIntyre
Jeremy Hylton
Andrew M. Kuchling