New submission from Martijn Pieters:
The following expression produces 127MB in constants in `co_consts` due to two
63.5MB integer objects produced when folding:
((200*200 - 2) & ((1 << 500000000) - 1)) + ((200*200 - 2) >> 500000000)
The optimizer already does not store optimized *sequences* of more than 20
elements to avoid making bytecode files too large:
If the new constant is a sequence, only folds when the size
is below a threshold value. That keeps pyc files from
becoming large in the presence of code like: (None,)*1000.
Perhaps the same should be extended to number objects?
Context:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/43823807/why-does-using-arguments-make-this-function-so-much-slower
----------
messages: 293167
nosy: mjpieters
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Peephole binops folding can lead to memory and bytecache ballooning
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue30293>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
