-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
gh-100176: Remove outdated Tools/{io,cc,string}bench #101853
Conversation
BTW, it allows to close gh-32135 as outdated. |
@rhettinger had some opinion on this as well. |
Sad to see Håvamål go 😢👁️ cpython/Tools/iobench/iobench.py Lines 482 to 548 in 81e3aa8
|
(Resolved conflict) |
I would have commented sooner had I known that this was about to happen. It would have been helpful if someone had commented in my PR to I believe it was clear from the extensive discussion about the shortcomings of the current GIL in faster-cpython that the That said, I do understand that performance scripts do not really have a place in the cpython source code repo, but unfortunately I do not have the time to rework the updated |
Apologies, I'll ping next time this sort of thing comes up. (btw we wouldn't be allowed to merge your PR because it looks like the CLA isn't signed.)
Yep, in general, benchmarks are much more useful in pyperformace, because they're run often and people pay attention to their results. The code hasn't disappeared, it's still in the 3.12 and older branches, and in Git history. And of course, if there's consensus we can easily revert/re-add bits of this. |
Go look at the PR history - I signed the CLA and the relevant label was added. Later the label was removed for some reason unknown to me.. |
…1853) Co-authored-by: Hugo van Kemenade <hugovk@users.noreply.github.com>
…1853) Co-authored-by: Hugo van Kemenade <hugovk@users.noreply.github.com>
Closes #32135.
Closes #100176.
Closes #100197.
See:
Replaces and: