Le mar. 26 févr. 2019 à 21:58, Neil Schemenauer <nas-pyt...@python.ca> a écrit : > It seems his name doesn't appear in the readme or source but I think > Rattlesnake was Skip Montanaro's project. I suppose my idea of > unifying the local variables and the registers could have came from > Rattlesnake. Very little new in the world. ;-P
In my implementation, constants, local variables and registers live all in the same array: frame.f_localsplus. Technically, there isn't much difference between a constant, local variable or a register. It's just the disassembler which has to worry to display "R3" or "x" depending on the register index ;-) There was a LOAD_CONST_REG instruction in my implementation, but it was more to keep a smooth transition from existing LOAD_CONST instruction. LOAD_CONST_REG could be avoided to pass directly the constant (ex: as a function argument). For example, I compiled "range(2, n)" as: LOAD_CONST_REG R0, 2 (const#2) LOAD_GLOBAL_REG R1, 'range' (name#0) CALL_FUNCTION_REG 4, R1, R1, R0, 'n' Whereas it could be just: LOAD_GLOBAL_REG R1, 'range' (name#0) CALL_FUNCTION_REG 4, R1, R1, <const #2>, 'n' Compare it to stack-based bytecode: LOAD_GLOBAL 0 (range) LOAD_CONST 2 (const#2) LOAD_FAST 'n' CALL_FUNCTION 2 (2 positional, 0 keyword pair) Victor -- Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
