Skip to content

Conversation

@sobolevn
Copy link
Member

@sobolevn sobolevn commented Jul 8, 2025

I also did a small refactoring of dict() -> {}, because {} is faster. and there's no need in using dict(). Since we are touching this code anyway, why not do a micro-speed-up?

Tests after:

» ./python.exe -OO -m test test_concurrent_futures
Using random seed: 4123239281
0:00:00 load avg: 1.79 Run 9 tests sequentially in a single process
0:00:00 load avg: 1.79 [1/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_as_completed
0:00:16 load avg: 1.63 [1/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_as_completed passed
0:00:16 load avg: 1.63 [2/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_deadlock
0:00:30 load avg: 1.61 [2/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_deadlock passed
0:00:30 load avg: 1.61 [3/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_future
0:00:33 load avg: 1.64 [3/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_future passed
0:00:33 load avg: 1.64 [4/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_init
0:00:34 load avg: 1.64 [4/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_init passed
0:00:34 load avg: 1.64 [5/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_interpreter_pool
0:00:45 load avg: 1.60 [5/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_interpreter_pool passed
0:00:45 load avg: 1.60 [6/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_process_pool
0:00:54 load avg: 1.55 [6/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_process_pool passed
0:00:54 load avg: 1.55 [7/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_shutdown
0:01:09 load avg: 1.88 [7/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_shutdown passed
0:01:09 load avg: 1.88 [8/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_thread_pool
0:01:09 load avg: 1.88 [8/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_thread_pool passed
0:01:09 load avg: 1.88 [9/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_wait
0:01:11 load avg: 1.88 [9/9] test_concurrent_futures.test_wait passed

== Tests result: SUCCESS ==

All 9 tests OK.

Total duration: 1 min 11 sec
Total tests: run=375 skipped=19
Total test files: run=9/9
Result: SUCCESS

@sobolevn sobolevn merged commit 3343fce into python:main Jul 11, 2025
79 of 81 checks passed
@miss-islington-app
Copy link

Thanks @sobolevn for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.14.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

miss-islington pushed a commit to miss-islington/cpython that referenced this pull request Jul 11, 2025
@bedevere-app
Copy link

bedevere-app bot commented Jul 11, 2025

GH-136540 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.14 branch.

@bedevere-app bedevere-app bot removed the needs backport to 3.14 bugs and security fixes label Jul 11, 2025
sobolevn added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 11, 2025
…ters (GH-136435) (#136540)

gh-136434: Fix docs generation of `UnboundItem` in subinterpreters (GH-136435)
(cherry picked from commit 3343fce)

Co-authored-by: sobolevn <[email protected]>
Pranjal095 pushed a commit to Pranjal095/cpython that referenced this pull request Jul 12, 2025
picnixz pushed a commit to picnixz/cpython that referenced this pull request Jul 13, 2025
taegyunkim pushed a commit to taegyunkim/cpython that referenced this pull request Aug 4, 2025
Agent-Hellboy pushed a commit to Agent-Hellboy/cpython that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2025
kumaraditya303 pushed a commit to miss-islington/cpython that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2025
…terpreters (pythonGH-136435) (python#136540)

pythongh-136434: Fix docs generation of `UnboundItem` in subinterpreters (pythonGH-136435)
(cherry picked from commit 3343fce)

Co-authored-by: sobolevn <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants