Message175532
| Author |
eric.snow |
| Recipients |
Thorney, eric.araujo, eric.snow, ezio.melotti, jackdied, ncoghlan, pitrou, python-dev, rhettinger |
| Date |
2012年11月14日.03:51:04 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1352865065.61.0.586605726674.issue12428@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> Possibly reduce could be handled in a similar way with a fallback python
> implementation? Otherwise your suggestion of conditionally adding it to __all__
> makes sense to me.
In the meantime I'd expect the import of _functools.reduce to not be wrapped in a try block. Does that have an impact on coverage?
>> * Should the pure Python partial only be used if _functools.partial is not available?
>> * Should _functools.partial be removed?
>
> What are the main considerations to properly answer these last questions? Performance
> comparison between the implementations, maintainability?
Sorry, the first time through I missed the part of the patch that tries to import _functools.partial _after_ the pure Python version is defined. |
|