On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 20:08, stefan brunthaler s.bruntha...@uci.edu wrote:
I understand all of these issues. Currently, it's not really a mess,
but much more complicated as it needs to be for only supporting the
inca optimization.
I really don't think that is a problem. The core contributors
I really don't think that is a problem. The core contributors can deal
well with complexity in my experience. :-)
No no, I wasn't trying to insinuate anything like that at all. No, I
just figured that having the code generator being able to generate 4
optimizations where only one is supported
How many times did you regenerate this code until you got it right?
Well, honestly, I changed the code generator to pack the new
optimized instruction derivatives densly into the available opcodes,
so that I can make optimal use of what's there. Thus I only generated
the code twice for this
Wiadomość napisana przez stefan brunthaler w dniu 1 lut 2012, o godz. 16:55:
And how do you know that you really got it so right that it was the last
time ever
that you needed your generator for it?
I am positive that I am going to need my code generator in the future,
as I have several
But let me put this straight: as an open-source project, we are hesitant to
accept changes which depend on closed software. Even if your optimization
techniques would result in performance a hundred times better than what is
currently achieved, we would still be wary to accept them.
Please
Let's make one thing clear. The Python core developers need to be able
to reproduce your results from scratch, and that means access to the
templates, code generators, inputs, and everything else you used. (Of
course for stuff you didn't write that's already open source, all we
need is a pointer
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 09:46, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
Let's make one thing clear. The Python core developers need to be able
to reproduce your results from scratch, and that means access to the
templates, code generators, inputs, and everything else you used. (Of
course for
On Feb 1, 2012, at 12:46 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
I understand that you're hesitant to just dump your current mess, and
you want to clean it up before you show it to us. That's fine. (...) And
remember, it doesn't need to be
perfect (in fact perfectionism is probably a bad idea here).
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 11:08 AM, stefan brunthaler s.bruntha...@uci.edu wrote:
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 09:46, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
Let's make one thing clear. The Python core developers need to be able
to reproduce your results from scratch, and that means access to the
I assume yes here means yes, I'm aware and not yes, I'm using Python
2, right? And you're building on top of the existing support for threaded
code in order to improve it?
Your assumption is correct, I'm sorry for the sloppiness (I was
heading out for lunch.) None of the code is 2.x
If I read the patch correctly, most of it is auto-generated (and there
is probably a few spurious changes that blow it up, such as the
python-gdb.py file).
Hm, honestly I don't know where the python-gdb.py file comes from, I
thought it came with the switch from 3.1 to the tip version I was
Am 31.01.2012 16:46, schrieb stefan brunthaler:
If I read the patch correctly, most of it is auto-generated (and there
is probably a few spurious changes that blow it up, such as the
python-gdb.py file).
Hm, honestly I don't know where the python-gdb.py file comes from, I
thought it came
There is also the issue of the two test modules removed from the
test suite.
Oh, I'm sorry, seems like the patch did contain too much of my
development stuff. (I did remove them before, because they were always
failing due to the instruction opcodes being changed because of
quickening; they
stefan brunthaler, 31.01.2012 22:17:
Well, nobody wants to review generated code.
I agree. The code generator basically uses templates that contain the
information and a dump of the C-structure of several types to traverse
and see which one of them implements which functions. There is really
Hello,
Could you try benchmarking with the standard benchmarks:
http://hg.python.org/benchmarks/
and see what sort of performance gains you get?
Yeah, of course. I already did. Refere to the page listed below for
details. I did not look into the results yet, though.
How portable is the
Hello,
Well, you can implement threaded code on any machine that support
indirect branch instructions. Fortunately, GCC supports the
label-as-values feature, which makes it available on any machine
that supports GCC. My optimizations themselves are portable, and I
tested them on a PowerPC
Well, you're aware that Python already uses threaded code where
available? Or are you testing against Python 2?
Yes, and I am building on that.
--stefan
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
stefan brunthaler, 30.01.2012 20:18:
Well, you're aware that Python already uses threaded code where
available? Or are you testing against Python 2?
Yes, and I am building on that.
I assume yes here means yes, I'm aware and not yes, I'm using Python
2, right? And you're building on top of the
Am 30.01.2012 20:06, schrieb stefan brunthaler:
Do you have a public repository for the code, so we can take a look?
I have created a patch (as Benjamin wanted) and put all of the
resources (i.e., benchmark results and the patch itself) on my home
page:
stefan brunthaler wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:36, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org wrote:
2011/11/8 stefan brunthaler s.bruntha...@uci.edu:
How does that sound?
I think I can hear real patches and benchmarks most clearly.
I spent the better part of my -20% time on
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:36, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org wrote:
2011/11/8 stefan brunthaler s.bruntha...@uci.edu:
How does that sound?
I think I can hear real patches and benchmarks most clearly.
I spent the better part of my -20% time on implementing the work as
suggested.
2012/1/27 stefan brunthaler s.bruntha...@uci.edu:
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 10:36, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org wrote:
2011/11/8 stefan brunthaler s.bruntha...@uci.edu:
How does that sound?
I think I can hear real patches and benchmarks most clearly.
I spent the better part of
Hi guys,
while there is at least some interest in incorporating my
optimizations, response has still been low. I figure that the changes
are probably too much for a single big incorporation step. On a recent
flight, I thought about cutting it down to make it more easily
digestible. The basic idea
2011/11/8 stefan brunthaler s.bruntha...@uci.edu:
How does that sound?
I think I can hear real patches and benchmarks most clearly.
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
24 matches
Mail list logo
