Larry Hastings larry at hastings.org
Thu Apr 26 14:33:04 EDT 2018

• Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] The new and improved PEP 572, same great taste with 75% less complexity!
• Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] The new and improved PEP 572, same great taste with 75% less complexity!
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

On 04/26/2018 11:18 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> In the reference implementation, it's just DUP_TOP followed by
> STORE_FAST (well, technically by "whatever the assignment compiles
> to", as it could be affected by global/nonlocal, closures, etc). Is
> there much advantage to creating a new opcode?

Probably not much, but I thought we now lived in an age of wonders where 
common sequences of opcodes were getting mashed together into new 
more-complicated-but-redundant bytecodes (e.g. 
BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL) just to save on dispatch overhead. You're 
right, it'd be a micro-optimization, and its value would be debatable.


//arry/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20180426/bffb7979/attachment.html>

---

• Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] The new and improved PEP 572, same great taste with 75% less complexity!
• Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] The new and improved PEP 572, same great taste with 75% less complexity!
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list