[Nick Coghlan]
> It's probably more relevant that cmp() went away, since that
> simplified the comparison logic to just PyObject_RichCompareBool,
> without the custom comparison function path.

Well, the current sort is old by now, and was written for Python 2.
But it did anticipate that rich comparisons were the future, and
deliberately restricted itself to using only "<" (Py_LT) comparisons.
So, same as now, only the "<" path needed to be examined.

> It *might* have still been possible to do something like this in the
> Py2 code (since the main requirement is to do the pre-check for
> consistent types if the first object is of a known type with an
> optimised fast path),

It shouldn't really matter whether it's a known type.  For any type,
if it's known that all the objects are of that type, that type's
tp_richcompare slot can be read up once, and if non-NULL used
throughout.  That would save several levels of function call per
comparison during the sort; although that's not factor-of-3-speedup
potential, it should still be a significant win.

> but I don't know anyone that actually *likes* adding new special cases
> to already complex code and trying to figure out how to test whether
> or not they've broken anything :)

A nice thing about this one is that special cases are a one-time thing
at the start, and don't change anything in the vast bulk of the
current sorting code.  So when it breaks, it should be pretty easy to
figure out why ;-)
Python-ideas mailing list
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Reply via email to