In the Edit Tool window that now appeared fill in a name, e.g. PEP8 and a group name Lint and add a description. Next point the Program to the location of the pep8.exe executable, e.g. C:\Python27\Scripts\pep8.exe. For Parameters you need to use $FilePath and Working directory should be filled in by default. Once done, you can close it by pressing the OK button.

Now, pyflakes has no .exe or .bat file to accompany it. You will need to add a pyflakes.bat in your Scripts directory inside Python with the following contents:

@echo off
rem Use python to execute the python script having the same name as this batch
rem file, but without any extension, located in the same directory as this
rem batch file
python "%~dpn0" %*

Within PyCharm you follow largely the same settings as for pep8, however make sure to point to the batch file of pyflakes under Program. Close the external tools configuration windows by clicking OK twice. Under the menu heading Tools you should see an submenu heading Lint which, in turn, should contain two menu items: PEP8 and Pyflakes.

Now open a Python file, go to Tools > Lint > PEP8 and you should get output like the following in your Run (4) window:

D:\Python26\Scripts\pep8.exe D:\pprojects\babel\babel\tests\__init__.py
D:\pprojects\babel\babel\tests\__init__.py:16:1: E302 expected 2 blank lines, found 1

Process finished with exit code 1

So, normally you would do something like the following in order to return JSON data:

return json.dumps(data)

Which would be used with the $.ajax() call in a way like the following:

$.ajax({
  type: "POST",
  url: "http://example.com/json/something",
  data: "parameter=value",
  dataType: "json",
  error: function(XMLHttpRequest, textStatus, errorThrown){},
  success: function(data, msg){}
});

Which is perfectly fine for scripts getting and using the data on the same host/domain. But, as said before, this will fail with warnings similar to: "Access to restricted URI denied" code: "1012" nsresult: "0xdeadc0de (NS_ERROR_DOM_BAD_URI)".

One way out of this is using JSONP. jQuery has a $.getJSON() function, which loads JSON data using a HTTP GET request. Now, the simplistic way to convert your code would be to change it as such:

$.getJSON("http://example.com/json/something",
  function(data){}
);

But this causes another issue. Since $.getJSON() GETs the JSON data, but doesn’t use eval() on it, but instead pulls the result into script tags, it somehow causes,on Firefox at least, an invalid label error. In order to fix this you need to set up the JSON data server to properly support a callback argument, to use $.getJSON() how it is meant to be used:

$.getJSON("http://example.com/json/something?jsoncallback=?",
  function(data){}
);

In the code above the additional parameter jsoncallback will, thanks to jQuery, get the question mark replaced by an alphanumeric string (typically in the form of jsonp followed by a timestamp). This value should be used to wrap the resulting JSON data with. This means you would have to change the initial Python code to something like this:

return request.args.get('jsoncallback') + '(' + json.dumps(data) + ')'

Of course this causes problems when you want to reuse the code for both AJAX use on the same host/domain and use it from outside. So in order to make both work you can test on whether or not the callback parameter is available and return the appropriate data. I came up with this little snippet for that:

def jsonwrapper(self, request, data):
    callback = request.args.get('jsoncallback')

    if callback:
        return callback + '(' + json.dumps(data) + ')'
    else:
        return json.dumps(data)

The default option flags are on my system: -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing -DNDEBUG -g -fwrapv -O3 -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes.

Considering some other comments about how I did not use a 0-origin for my y-axis I have to point out two things: firstly, given the sometimes close results zooming out too much can eliminate detailed information (of course you have to be careful not to zoom in too much as well); secondly, I like to make sure the graph itself is appropriately centered so you do not get a whitespace skewing in the resulting image. I think, being a follower of the Edward Tufte school of graphic displaying, I did reasonably well. The graphs were made with a tool called Ploticus.

I was curious how the optimization level influenced the resulting program and as such I removed the -O3 option from the compiler flags. As is evident from the graph you are looking at a bit more than a doubling of execution time (an average of 14,2 seconds versus the previous 6,6 and 6,5 seconds).

So, given the huge performance hit by merely leaving out the -O3, I was interested how the other optimization levels worked out. Holger Hoffstätte asked to use -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer instead of -O3. Basically the results of -O3 (average of 6,5 seconds) and -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer (average of 6,5 seconds) were equal. The result of using -O1 (I could not really discern much of a speed difference by adding -fomit-frame-pointer, also for the -O2 case it was still an average of 6,5 seconds) was quite interesting. It already improves execution by ~86%. From -O1 to -O2/-O3 we are looking at another increase of ~16%. From the no optimization case to -O2/-O3 execution improves by ~118%

I tried a profile-guided optimization build, but I have some issues on my FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE with libgcov. Apparently only a libgconv.a is provided and linking gives me a relocation warning. Thankfully I also had a GCC 4.2.4 snapshot from March installed and did a PGO build, but I managed to only shave of about 0,2 seconds on the average time.

First various GCC versions: 3.3.6, 3.4.6, 4.1.3, 4.2.1:

It is good to see that the 3.4 series is faster than the 3.3 series and the 4.2 series is faster than the 4.1 series. I am a bit worried about the 4.1 series drop in performance compared to the 3 series though.

Next we have Python compiled with GCC 3.4.6, 4.2.1, Intel CC 10.1.015, MSC from Visual Studio 2008:

It is nice to see how the Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 compiler produces a binary that, when run through Wine, still performs quite well compared to GCC. I am not quite sure if Wine incurs a performance penalty or not. What’s quite impressive is the performance of the Intel CC compiled Python. If we take the fastest GCC, which is 4.2.1 at the moment, take the average of the 10 rounds of execution, which is 6,574 seconds, and compare that to the average of ICC, which is 5,412 seconds, we see that ICC is about 21% faster. If we take the slowest, GCC 4.1.3 with an average of 7,002 seconds, we even get a result that ICC is about 29% faster.

So it seems for people who want to get the full performance out of Python compiling with ICC might be quite beneficial. I want to check out how ICC progressed from version 8 to version 10 performance-wise.

The raw data can be found at http://www.in-nomine.org/~asmodai/python-pybench.txt.

Just after New Year TIOBE reported this:

Python has been declared as programming language of 2007. It was a close finish, but in the end Python appeared to have the largest increase in ratings in one year time (2.04%). There is no clear reason why Python made this huge jump in 2007. Last month Python surpassed Perl for the first time in history, which is an indication that Python has become the “de facto” glue language at system level. It is especially beloved by system administrators and build managers. Chances are high that Python’s star will rise further in 2008, thanks to the upcoming release of Python 3.

There are a lot of really interesting developments going on.  Some interesting developments in my opinion are (in no particular order): Babel, Bitten, Genshi, Trac, Werkzeug, WebOb.

An exciting year indeed.

I have it on my todo list to convert my current CherryPy environment to Werkzeug as a proof of concept and see which one of the two I prefer and will ultimately use for my Japanese-Dutch dictionary project.