➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author serhiy.storchaka
Recipients Yury.Selivanov, casevh, josh.r, lemburg, mark.dickinson, pitrou, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, skrah, vstinner, yselivanov, zbyrne
Date 2016-02-05.17:01:35
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1454691695.77.0.686746883415.issue21955@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content 
My patches were just samples. I'm glad that Yury incorporated the main idea and that this helps. If apply any patch I would prefer fastint5.patch. But I don't quite understand why it adds any gain. Is this just due to overhead of calling PyNumber_Add? Then we should test with other compilers and with the LTO option. fastint5.patch adds an overhead for type checks and increases the size of ceval loop. What is outweigh this overhead?

As for tests, it would be more honest to test data that results out of small ints range (-5..256).
History
Date User Action Args
2016-02-05 17:01:35serhiy.storchakasetrecipients: + serhiy.storchaka, lemburg, rhettinger, mark.dickinson, pitrou, vstinner, casevh, skrah, Yury.Selivanov, yselivanov, josh.r, zbyrne
2016-02-05 17:01:35serhiy.storchakasetmessageid: <1454691695.77.0.686746883415.issue21955@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2016-02-05 17:01:35serhiy.storchakalinkissue21955 messages
2016-02-05 17:01:35serhiy.storchakacreate