stefan brunthaler, 30.08.2011 22:41:
Ok, there there's something else you haven't told us. Are you saying
that the original (old) bytecode is still used (and hence written to
and read from .pyc files)?
Short answer: yes.
Long answer: I added an invocation counter to the code object and keep
interpreting in the usual Python interpreter until this counter
reaches a configurable threshold. When it reaches this threshold, I
create the new instruction format and interpret with this optimized
representation. All the macros look exactly the same in the source
code, they are just redefined to use the different instruction format.
I am at no point serializing this representation or the runtime
information gathered by me, as any subsequent invocation might have
different characteristics.
So, basically, you built a JIT compiler but don't want to call it that,
right? Just because it compiles byte code to other byte code rather than to
native CPU instructions does not mean it doesn't compile Just In Time.
That actually sounds like a nice feature in general. It could even replace
(or accompany?) the existing peep hole optimiser as part of a more general
optimisation architecture, in the sense that it could apply byte code
optimisations at runtime rather than compile time, potentially based on
better knowledge about what's actually going on.
I will remove my development commentaries and create a private
repository at bitbucket
I agree with the others that it's best to open up your repository for
everyone who is interested. I can see no reason why you would want to close
it back down once it's there.
Stefan
_______________________________________________
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
