Message298949
| Author | serhiy.storchaka |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Demur Rumed, Mark.Shannon, benjamin.peterson, christian.heimes, mark.dickinson, nascheme, pitrou, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, trent, vstinner |
| Date | 2017-07-24.09:59:41 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1500890381.89.0.588048717297.issue17611@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Great! I tried to update the patch myself, but there were too much conflicts. Thank you very much Antoine for taking this! Seems there are bugs in frame_setlineno() related to code duplications. And deduplicating the 'finally' blocks doesn't solve all of them. See comments on GitHub. I don't like the new END_ITER instruction. This complicates (and slows down) the evaluation loop and the peepholer. This also adds a limitation on the peepholer (END_ITER can't be optimized out). We can use other way for determaining the end of the 'for' block. The argument of the FOR_ITER instruction points to the end of the 'for' block. Just scan all addresses from 0 to max_addr and count all FOR_ITER instructions and their targets in the range between min_addr and max_addr. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2017-07-24 09:59:41 | serhiy.storchaka | set | recipients: + serhiy.storchaka, nascheme, rhettinger, mark.dickinson, pitrou, vstinner, christian.heimes, benjamin.peterson, trent, Mark.Shannon, Demur Rumed |
| 2017-07-24 09:59:41 | serhiy.storchaka | set | messageid: <1500890381.89.0.588048717297.issue17611@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2017-07-24 09:59:41 | serhiy.storchaka | link | issue17611 messages |
| 2017-07-24 09:59:41 | serhiy.storchaka | create | |