On 11/9/05, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/9/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I like Phillip's suggestion -- no new opcode, just a conditional jump > > > > that can be easily optimized out. > > > > > > Huh? But Phillip is suggesting a new opcode that is essentially the > > > same as my proposal but naming it differently and saying the bytecode > > > should get changed directly instead of having the eval loop handle the > > > semantic differences based on whether -O is being used. > > > > Sorry. > > No problem. Figured you just misread mine. > > > Looking back they look pretty much the same to me. Somehow I > > glanced over Phillip's code and thought he was proposing to use a > > regular JUMP_IF opcode with the special __debug__ variable (which > > would be a 3rd possibility, good if we had backwards compatibility > > requirements for bytecode -- which we don't, fortunately :-). > > > > Fortunately. =) > > So does this mean you like the idea? Should this all move forward somehow?
I guess so. :-) It will need someone thinking really hard about all the use cases, edge cases, etc., implementation details, and writing up a PEP. Feel like volunteering? You might squeeze Phillip as a co-author. He's a really good one. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
