These things still need attention:
Many tests are showing refcount leaks as of Saturday; Tim suspects the new exception code.
The hotbuf branch will be completed after the sprint. I want to implement common parsing patterns (line delimited, netstrings) in C (MartinBlais).
- The patch implementing optimizing out "if 0" still needs review.
- Andrew Dalke has experimented with optimizing some common cases in argument parsing, which looks very promising, but needs further attention.
Internal string->object parsing routines (int(), float(), etc) need a way to bound the portion of the string they'll look at. This is partly bugfix, since passing a buffer object to such a Python-level routine results in anything from nonsense to segfaults now.
Tim intends to continue work on the tim-exc_sanity branch.
- Fredrik intends to continue work on stringlib refactoring.
- Ran out of time before getting to most of the "speed function calls" patches. Since any speedup in that area would benefit almost all users, they're still well worth pursuing.
Any branches that are not intended to continue work should be removed before leaving the sprint. DONE - TP
Coverity's overnight (Saturday/Sunday) run shows a few new NULL complaints; need to investigate. DONE - TP
- Look at Kristján's ideas for speeding up lookdict_string. I've played with dummy optimization and inline string compare on my machine, which gives a small but noticable speedup. IIRC, the original patch contained a few more tweaks - FL
Edit conflict - other version:
Lessons Learned
Visual Studio / Code Coverage Tools
If anyone uses Windows and is planning to use C code coverage tools to possibly look at improving the test suite, or perhaps for profiling, they might want to obtain them well in advance of a sprint.
I was unable to locate any free tools which worked with Visual Studio, and any commercial ones which even vaguely claimed to do so generally required an indefinite delay after submitting a marketing related form before you could access a downloadable trial version. Perhaps instead of applying for a trial version, it might be worthwhile to apply for a free license for Python development.
Here are the code coverage capable tools which I tried to obtain and use, and short notes about them:
[http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/teamsystem/default.aspx Visual Studio Team System]
- This cannot be downloaded, but a 180 day trial can be obtained on request mailed out on DVD. CCP had a license for it already, but strangely only had beta 2 versions which had expired and was not able to locate a final version in time despite being entitled to one.
[http://www.compuware.com/products/devpartner/studio.htm DevPartner Studio]
- This requires an application for a trial version and an indefinite delay before the marketing department get back to you, by phone I believe! It is possible to locate binaries on file sharing services, which can be installed in a trial mode, but they were unusable in our experience. An older version, 7.00, required VS .NET at the latest, and I was unable to get it to work at a command line level with later versions. The more recent version 8.00, worked with VS 2005, but when a build was made with profiling instrumentation, their compiler crashed repeatedly. Version 8.00 also does not support x64 based versions of Windows.
[http://www-306.ibm.com/software/awdtools/purifyplus Rational Purify]
- This appears to be the one commercial tool which offers a downloadable trial version and does not require indefinite marketing department hoops to be jumped. However, I was completely unable to create an account on IBM's web site, due to vague complaints about unsuitable user names and passwords. I suspect that this is a problem which others can get around, because of better guesses at suitable entries for these fields.
Here is another possibility, which I did not know about at the sprint:
[http://www.bullseye.com Bullseye Coverage]
- Does not have a downloadable trial, but I believe one can be obtained after the marketing department receive your submitted application.
Edit conflict - your version:
Lessons Learned
Visual Studio / Code Coverage Tools
If anyone uses Windows and is planning to use C code coverage tools to possibly look at improving the test suite, or perhaps for profiling, they might want to obtain them well in advance of a sprint.
I was unable to locate any free tools which worked with Visual Studio, and any commercial ones which even vaguely claimed to do so generally required an indefinite delay after submitting a marketing related form before you could access a downloadable trial version. Perhaps instead of applying for a trial version, it might be worthwhile to apply for a free license for Python development.
Here are the code coverage capable tools which I tried to obtain and use, and short notes about them:
[http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/teamsystem/default.aspx Visual Studio Team System]
- This cannot be downloaded, but a 180 day trial can be obtained on request mailed out on DVD. CCP had a license for it already, but strangely only had beta 2 versions which had expired and was not able to locate a final version in time despite being entitled to one.
[http://www.compuware.com/products/devpartner/studio.htm DevPartner Studio]
- This requires an application for a trial version and an indefinite delay before the marketing department get back to you, by phone I believe! It is possible to locate binaries on file sharing services, which can be installed in a trial mode, but they were unusable in our experience. An older version, 7.00, required VS .NET at the latest, and I was unable to get it to work at a command line level with later versions. The more recent version 8.00, worked with VS 2005, but when a build was made with profiling instrumentation, their compiler crashed repeatedly. Version 8.00 also does not support x64 based versions of Windows.
[http://www-306.ibm.com/software/awdtools/purifyplus Rational Purify]
- This appears to be the one commercial tool which offers a downloadable trial version and does not require indefinite marketing department hoops to be jumped. However, I was completely unable to create an account on IBM's web site, due to vague complaints about unsuitable user names and passwords. I suspect that this is a problem which others can get around, because of better guesses at suitable entries for these fields.
Here is another possibility, which I did not know about at the sprint:
[http://www.bullseye.com Bullseye Coverage]
- Does not have a downloadable trial, but I believe one can be obtained after the marketing department receive your submitted application.
End of edit conflict