Message263775
> FYI, there is a proposition about constructing arguments tuple and dict in bytecode instead of ceval.c. This will significantly simplify CALL_FUNCTION (which will get just one optional tuple and one optional dict). Likely this idea will be implemented after changing to wordcode.
Wordcode is the issue #26647.
Do you have a reference to the more efficient implementation of CALL_FUNCTION? I recall vaguely this idea.
--
It was also proposed to pass keyword arguments as positional arguments: replace func(a=1, b=2) with func(1, 2) with "def func(a, b): ...". But this optimization requires something like FAT Python to disable the optimization if the function is replaced at runtime.
This optimization is more complex, maybe it's not worth. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2016-04-19 21:28:36 | vstinner | set | recipients:
+ vstinner, python-dev, martin.panter, serhiy.storchaka, yselivanov, josh.r, llllllllll |
2016-04-19 21:28:36 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1461101316.66.0.532562367455.issue26802@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2016-04-19 21:28:36 | vstinner | link | issue26802 messages |
2016-04-19 21:28:36 | vstinner | create | |
|