Message309161
I wonder if I should drop PR 4682. I spent some more time working on it today. I switched to the same scheme as Serhiy for the no-exception case, i.e. push a single NULL value, rather than six NULLs. In ceval, we need to handle the non-exception case specially anyhow so I think it better to avoid the "stack churn". With the micro-benchmarks that Serhiy posted, PR 4682 is as fast or slightly faster than PR 5006. Doesn't really matter in real code though.
I did not push my latest changes as I did not fix the frame.f_lineno issue yet. I think it is fixable without major changes. Should I bother though? Is there some other reason to prefer duplicating the final bodies rather than using a subroutine jump (as in 5006)? A very minor speedup is not worth it I think because the compiler is a bit more complicated. The settrace logic is more complicated too. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2017-12-29 05:26:45 | nascheme | set | recipients:
+ nascheme, rhettinger, mark.dickinson, ncoghlan, pitrou, christian.heimes, benjamin.peterson, trent, Mark.Shannon, serhiy.storchaka, Demur Rumed |
2017-12-29 05:26:45 | nascheme | set | messageid: <1514525205.86.0.213398074469.issue17611@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2017-12-29 05:26:45 | nascheme | link | issue17611 messages |
2017-12-29 05:26:45 | nascheme | create | |
|