Try reading the comment you replied to again. A valid reason for a search is the collection of evidence of a crime. Which orthogonal to whether the person or premisses committed a crime.
What works for me with overdrive is using holds and then when it comes available, if I'm not ready to read I let someone skip ahead of me. That way I'm still next in line but it gives me a few days until someone else finishes the book and then it pings me again.
The standards don't remove the need for code review. In fact they provide a standard to be used in code review. Anything you can automate is nice, but when you have exceptions to rules that say "Exception, if there's no reasonable way to do X then Y is acceptable" isn't really something you can codify into static analysis.
Python is slow due to design decisions in the language. For example operator dispatch is slow without some kind of static analysis. But this is hindered by how dynamic the language is.
It's hard to make Python run fast when it pervasively uses duck typing. It makes types only resolvable at runtime. JIT is the only thing that can work here at the moment, but I think that needs to make very similar assumptions to a branch predictor, plus it needs to identify lexical regions (is that what they're called?). People here have criticised PyPy, but I've forgotten why.
reply