Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Python 3.7 Released With C API For Thread-Local Storage, Data Classes, Context Variables

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Python 3.7 Released With C API For Thread-Local Storage, Data Classes, Context Variables

    Phoronix: Python 3.7 Released With C API For Thread-Local Storage, Data Classes, Context Variables

    Python 3.7 is now available as the latest major release to Python 3 with new features, performance optimizations, and other enhancements...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    I'll be very interested to try out breakpoint() when my distribution gets the update. Sounds neat.

    Comment


    • #3
      We're up to Python 3.7 now and we still haven't purged 2.7 from everything yet

      Comment


      • #4
        My biggest gripe with Python is that the standard library does not have any asynchronous HTTP client. 😢

        Comment


        • #5
          I see lots of optimizations here and there all over the changelog. It's moderately satisfying to think of it, given I use Qutebrowser, which is a python interface around qt-webengine.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by FireBurn View Post
            We're up to Python 3.7 now and we still haven't purged 2.7 from everything yet
            Many companies are stuck with Python 2 and many developers think it's better at handling low level byte data.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by caligula View Post

              Many companies are stuck with Python 2 and many developers think it's better at handling low level byte data.
              Said companies include Google. And if you've ever done cross-boundary stuff such as using zeromq, calling a bytes API, or calling C, Unicode-by-default is pure hell.

              Funnily enough, though 2.x pip downloads are declinging relative to 3, they are still to this day higher than 3.x in the Numerical Python community. So 2.7 is not going away anytime soon.

              Here is the data:

              month py2pip py3pip
              1 2016-01 754785 162589
              2 2016-02 2429183 518441
              3 2016-03 473050 104225
              4 2016-05 1108503 249627
              5 2016-06 3460566 744557
              6 2016-07 3777775 736221
              7 2016-08 3772339 926367
              8 2016-09 3418681 951603
              9 2016-10 3963772 1242959
              10 2016-11 4210267 1163311
              11 2016-12 3901717 1115862
              12 2017-01 4381947 1411295
              13 2017-02 4367254 1596966
              14 2017-03 5989363 2055947
              15 2017-04 5884109 2116833
              16 2017-05 6713310 2234050
              17 2017-06 8383859 2686225
              18 2017-07 8418105 3028983
              19 2017-08 7397053 3231351
              20 2017-09 6634032 3212955
              21 2017-10 7651790 3916238
              22 2017-11 8805290 3212670
              23 2017-12 6879320 3509196
              24 2018-01 7074179 3776558
              25 2018-02 7320313 3376908
              26 2018-03 5453308 3240535
              27 2018-04 5539154 3629259
              28 2018-05 4903729 3825077
              29 2018-06 3794980 3715831


              Instructions for replicating this can be found here:

              http://www.randalolson.com/2016/09/0...-pip-installs/

              be careful to extend the end date date to the present
              Last edited by vegabook; 28 June 2018, 07:27 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Hi-Angel View Post
                I see lots of optimizations here and there all over the changelog. It's moderately satisfying to think of it, given I use Qutebrowser, which is a python interface around qt-webengine.
                Or QtWebKit if you prefer (as I do).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                  My biggest gripe with Python is that the standard library does not have any asynchronous HTTP client. 😢
                  Python's standard library has suffered from some bad ideas. I'm happy that they don't try to stick everything in there because once in it's hard to rip it out and has to sit in there for years, actively harming the community because people think they're supposed to use it.

                  Just use any of the asynchronous client modules that are out there already.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by PluMGMK View Post

                    Or QtWebKit if you prefer (as I do).
                    Why do you? I benchmarked both engines of Qutebrowser, and (unsurprisingly perhaps) webengine is faster.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X