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 matrixise, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner
Date 2016-11-25.11:27:24
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1480073244.48.0.39752344243.issue28800@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Do you want to add RETURN_NONE or RETURN_CONST? Or both?

Adding new special opcodes can decrease the size of the code and increase performance of some cases. But it adds maintenance burden, increases the complexity of the compiler and peephole optimizer, and increases the size of ceval loop. The latter can have negative effect on the performance. I think we should add new specialized opcodes only if they adds measurable gain to global performance or large speed up of important particular cases.

It would help if you gather the statistics of RETURN_* opcodes. How many RETURN_VALUE, RETURN_CONST and RETURN_NONE instructions are compiled and executed during running Python tests? Compare it with total number of compiled and executed instructions.
History
Date User Action Args
2016-11-25 11:27:24serhiy.storchakasetrecipients: + serhiy.storchaka, rhettinger, vstinner, matrixise
2016-11-25 11:27:24serhiy.storchakasetmessageid: <1480073244.48.0.39752344243.issue28800@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2016-11-25 11:27:24serhiy.storchakalinkissue28800 messages
2016-11-25 11:27:24serhiy.storchakacreate