Re: [Python-Dev] (name := expression) doesn't fit the narrative of PEP 20

Hi, 2018-04-28 5:08 GMT+02:00 Armin Rigo : > Hi, > > On 26 April 2018 at 07:50, Raymond Hettinger > wrote: > >> [Raymond Hettinger ] > >>> After re-reading all the proposed code samples, I believe that > >>>

Re: [Python-Dev] Python startup time

2017-07-21 4:52 GMT+02:00 Nick Coghlan : > On 21 July 2017 at 12:44, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > We can separately measure the cost of unmarshalling the code object: > > > > $ python3 -m perf timeit -s "import typing; from marshal import loads; > from > >

Re: [Python-Dev] Python startup time

2017-07-20 19:23 GMT+02:00 Victor Stinner <victor.stin...@gmail.com>: > 2017-07-20 19:09 GMT+02:00 Cesare Di Mauro <cesare.di.ma...@gmail.com>: > > I assume that Python loads compiled (.pyc and/or .pyo) from the stdlib. > That's something that also influences the startup t

Re: [Python-Dev] Python startup time

2017-07-19 16:26 GMT+02:00 Victor Stinner : > 2017-07-19 15:22 GMT+02:00 Oleg Broytman : > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 02:59:52PM +0200, Victor Stinner < > victor.stin...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> "Python is very slow to start on Windows 7" > >>

Re: [Python-Dev] Micro-optimizations by adding special-case bytecodes?

Hi Ben, for what you're interested in, you might give a look at WPython 1.0 ( https://code.google.com/archive/p/wpython/downloads ) and 1.1 ( https://code.google.com/archive/p/wpython2/downloads ), but they cover a lot of optimizations (as you can see from a brief look at the slides):

Re: [Python-Dev] Speeding up CPython 5-10%

; Anyway, just offering things already written. If you don't feel it's > useful, no worries. > > > On Wed, May 18, 2016, at 11:35 AM, Cesare Di Mauro wrote: > > 2016-05-17 8:25 GMT+02:00 <zr...@fastmail.com>: > > In the project https://github.com/zachariahreed/byteasm

Re: [Python-Dev] Speeding up CPython 5-10%

2016-05-17 8:25 GMT+02:00 : > In the project https://github.com/zachariahreed/byteasm I mentioned on > the list earlier this month, I have a pass that to computes stack usage > for a given sequence of bytecodes. It seems to be a fair bit more > agressive than cpython. Maybe

Re: [Python-Dev] Speeding up CPython 5-10%

2016-05-16 17:55 GMT+02:00 Meador Inge <mead...@gmail.com>: > On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 2:23 AM, Cesare Di Mauro < > cesare.di.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Just one thing that comes to my mind: is the stack depth calculation >> routine changed? It was subopti

Re: [Python-Dev] Speeding up CPython 5-10%

2016-02-01 17:54 GMT+01:00 Yury Selivanov : > Thanks for bringing this up! > > IIRC wpython was about using "fat" bytecodes, i.e. using 64bits per > bytecode instead of 8. No, it used 16, 32, and 48-bit per opcode (1, 2, or 3 16-bit words). > That allows to minimize

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode: new regular bytecode using 16-bit units

2016-04-13 23:23 GMT+02:00 Victor Stinner : > Hopefully, I don't expect 32-bit parameters in the wild, only 24-bit > parameter for function with annotation. > I never found 32-bit parameters, and not even 24-bit ones. I think that their usage is as rare as all planets

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode: new regular bytecode using 16-bit units

2016-04-13 18:24 GMT+02:00 Victor Stinner : > Demur Rumed proposes a different change to use a regular bytecode > using 16-bit units: an instruction has always one 8-bit argument, it's > zero if the instruction doesn't have an argument: > >

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-02-17 12:04 GMT+01:00 Antoine Pitrou : > Demur Rumed gmail.com> writes: > > I've personally benchmarked this fork with positive results. > > I'm skeptical of claims like this. What did you benchmark exactly, and with > which results? > I don't think changing the opcode

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-02-15 8:14 GMT+01:00 Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev < python-dev@python.org>: > Despite the name (and inspiration), my fork has very little to do with > WPython. I'm just focused on simpler (hopefully = faster) fetch code; he > started with that, but ended up going the exact opposite

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-02-15 1:20 GMT+01:00 Demur Rumed : > Saw recent discussion: > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-February/143013.html > > I remember trying WPython; it was fast. Unfortunately it feels it came at > the wrong time when development was invested in getting

Re: [Python-Dev] Speeding up CPython 5-10%

2016-02-02 10:28 GMT+01:00 Victor Stinner : > 2016-01-27 19:25 GMT+01:00 Yury Selivanov : > > tl;dr The summary is that I have a patch that improves CPython > performance > > up to 5-10% on macro benchmarks. Benchmarks results on Macbook Pro/Mac

Re: [Python-Dev] A new JIT compiler for a faster CPython?

2012/7/18 Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info WPython in particular seems to be very promising, and quite fast. I don't understand why it doesn't get more attention (although I admit I can't criticise, since I haven't installed or used it myself).

Re: [Python-Dev] A new JIT compiler for a faster CPython?

2012/7/18 Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com I don't expect to run a program 10x faster, but I would be happy if I can run arbitrary Python code 25% faster. If that's your target, you don't need to resort to a bytecode-to-binary-equivalent compiler. WPython already gave similar results

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations continued...

2011/9/1 Ned Batchelder n...@nedbatchelder.com When the switchover to the new instruction format happens, what happens to sys.settrace() tracing? Will it report the same sequence of line numbers? For a small but important class of program executions, this is more important than speed.

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations continued...

2011/9/1 Mark Shannon m...@hotpy.org Cesare Di Mauro wrote: 2011/9/1 Ned Batchelder n...@nedbatchelder.com mailto: n...@nedbatchelder.com When the switchover to the new instruction format happens, what happens to sys.settrace() tracing? Will it report the same sequence of line

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations continued...

2011/8/31 stefan brunthaler ste...@brunthaler.net I think that you must deal with big endianess because some RISC can't handle at all data in little endian format. In WPython I have wrote some macros which handle both endianess, but lacking big endian machines I never had the

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations continued...

2011/8/31 Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.di.ma...@gmail.com wrote: It isn't, because motivation to do something new with CPython vanishes, at least on some areas (virtual machine / ceval.c), even having some ideas to experiment

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations continued...

2011/8/30 Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net Changing the bytecode width wouldn't make the interpreter more complex. It depends on the kind of changes. :) WPython introduced a very different intermediate code representation that required a big change on the peepholer optimizer on 1.0 alpha

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations continued...

2011/8/30 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com Yeah, it's definitely a trade-off - the point I was trying to make is that there *is* a trade-off being made between complexity and speed. I think the computed-gotos stuff struck a nice balance - the macro-fu involved means that you can still

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations continued...

2011/8/30 stefan brunthaler ste...@brunthaler.net Yes, indeed I have a more straightforward instruction format to allow for more efficient decoding. Just going from bytecode size to word-code size without changing the instruction format is going to require 8 (or word-size) times more memory

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations continued...

2011/8/30 stefan brunthaler ste...@brunthaler.net Do I sense that the bytecode format is no longer platform-independent? That will need a bit of discussion. I bet there are some things around that depend on that. Hm, I haven't really thought about that in detail and for longer, I ran it

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations continued...

2011/8/31 Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu I find myself more comfortable with the Cesare Di Mauro's idea of expanding to 16 bits as the code unit. His basic idea was using 2, 4, or 6 bytes instead of 1, 3, or 6. It can be expanded to longer than 6 bytes opcodes, if needed. The format is

Re: [Python-Dev] CPython optimization: storing reference counters outside of objects

2011/5/24 Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de Maciej Fijalkowski, 24.05.2011 13:31: CPython was not designed for CPU cache usage as far as I'm aware. That's a pretty bold statement to make on this list. Even if it wasn't originally designed for (efficient?) CPU cache usage, it's certainly

Re: [Python-Dev] CPython optimization: storing reference counters outside of objects

2011/5/23 Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de I'm not a compiler/profiling expert so the main question is if such design can work, and maybe someone was thinking about something similar? My expectation is that your approach would likely make the issues worse in a multi-CPU setting. If you

[Python-Dev] PyLongObject safe changes?

Hi I have little knowledge of some Python (3.2) internals on objects' internal structure handling. Suppose that I have any PyLongObject object (even internal / shared ones) and that - I need to change some or all of its internal values (size, sign, digits) in a critical section; - the critical

Re: [Python-Dev] Suggest reverting today's checkin (recursive constant folding in the peephole optimizer)

2011/3/14 Alexander Belopolsky alexander.belopol...@gmail.com On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to withdraw my suggestion for the recursive constant folding patch to be reverted. So what is the status of peephole optimization

Re: [Python-Dev] Suggest reverting today's checkin (recursive constant folding in the peephole optimizer)

2011/3/12 Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org 2011/3/11 Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com: Today, there was a significant check-in to the peephole optimizer that I think should be reverted: http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/14205d0fee45/ The peephole optimizer

Re: [Python-Dev] short fetch for NEXTARG macro (was: one byte byte code arguments)

2011/1/31 Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 13:28:39 +0100 Jurjen N.E. Bos jurjen@hetnet.nl wrote: I just did it: my first python source code hack. I replaced the NEXTARG and PEEKARG macros in ceval.c using a cast to short pointer, and lo and behold, a crude

Re: [Python-Dev] Byte code arguments from two to one byte: did anyone try this?

2011/1/31 Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu On 1/31/2011 5:31 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: Jurjen N.E. Bos wrote: I was impressed by the optimizations already in there, but I still dare to suggest an optimization that from my estimates might shave off a few cycles, speeding up Python about 5%.

Re: [Python-Dev] Possible optimization for LOAD_FAST ?

2011/1/1 Ned Batchelder n...@nedbatchelder.com On 12/31/2010 12:51 PM, Cesare Di Mauro wrote: Aggressive optimizations can be enabled with explicit options, in order to leave normal debugger-prone code. I wish the Python compiler would adopt a strategy of being able to disable

Re: [Python-Dev] Possible optimization for LOAD_FAST ?

2011/1/3 Alex Gaynor alex.gay...@gmail.com No, it's singularly impossible to prove that any global load will be any given value at compile time. Any optimization based on this premise is wrong. Alex That's your opinion, but I have very different ideas. Of course we can't leave the

Re: [Python-Dev] Possible optimization for LOAD_FAST ?

2010/12/31 Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski fij...@gmail.com wrote: OK, but is it mandatory? For example, in the above code, I can unroll the loop because I found that range is the usual built-in, 5 is a low-enough constant, How

Re: [Python-Dev] Possible optimization for LOAD_FAST ?

2010/12/31 Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us Cesare Di Mauro wrote: 2010/12/29 Martin v. Löwis wrote: Am 28.12.2010 18:08, schrieb Lukas Lueg: Also, the load_fast in lne 22 to reference x could be taken out of the loop as x will always point to the same object That's

Re: [Python-Dev] Possible optimization for LOAD_FAST ?

2010/12/31 s...@pobox.com Another example. I can totally remove the variable i, just using the stack, so a debugger (or, in general, having the tracing enabled) cannot even find something to change about it. Ethan -1 Ethan Debugging is challenging enough as it is --

Re: [Python-Dev] Possible optimization for LOAD_FAST ?

2010/12/28 Lukas Lueg lukas.l...@googlemail.com Consider the following code: def foobar(x): for i in range(5): x[i] = i The bytecode in python 2.7 is the following: 2 0 SETUP_LOOP 30 (to 33) 3 LOAD_GLOBAL 0 (range)

Re: [Python-Dev] Possible optimization for LOAD_FAST ?

2010/12/29 Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de Am 28.12.2010 18:08, schrieb Lukas Lueg: Also, the load_fast in lne 22 to reference x could be taken out of the loop as x will always point to the same object That's not true; a debugger may change the value of x. Regards, Martin OK,

Re: [Python-Dev] mingw support?

2010/8/13 Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz Cesare Di Mauro wrote: You must suggest at least an equivalent free alternative to make the switch convenient. Otherwise we are talking about philosophy or religion, and nobody will change his ideas. I think the point is that *because

Re: [Python-Dev] mingw support?

2010/8/12 li...@gabriel-striewe.de On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 05:38:52PM +0900, David Cournapeau wrote: On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 10:21 PM, Sturla Molden stu...@molden.no wrote: David Cournapeau: Autotools only help for posix-like platforms. They are certainly a big hindrance on

Re: [Python-Dev] Drive suffix

2010/8/5 Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz James Mills wrote: Windows is one of the only Operating Systems with a File system that reuiqres this [A-Z]:\ syntax. There's also VMS, but it uses a colon too. Also its pathnames are funky enough in other ways that it needs its own

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations...

2010/7/23 Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de stefan brunthaler, 23.07.2010 08:48: If we take for instance the BINARY_ADD instruction, the interpreter evaluates the actual operand types and chooses the matching operation implementation at runtime, i.e., operands that are unicode strings will

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 optimizations...

2010/7/23 stefan brunthaler ste...@brunthaler.net This sounds like wpython (a CPython derivative with a wider set of byte code commands) could benefit from it. I am aware of the wpython project of Cesare di Mauro. wpython has reached 1.1 final version. If you are interested, you can

Re: [Python-Dev] Can Python implementations reject semantically invalid expressions?

. (We have a long history of constant propagation in expressions causing subtle bugs. This could be worse.) -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) from __future__ import compile_checks Cesare Di Mauro ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev

Re: [Python-Dev] WPython 1.1 was released

2010/6/23 Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 08:12:36 pm Cesare Di Mauro wrote: I've released WPython 1.1, which brings many optimizations and refactorings. For those of us who don't know what WPython is, and are too lazy, too busy, or reading their email off-line

Re: [Python-Dev] WPython 1.1 was released

2010/6/23 Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu On 6/23/2010 7:28 AM, Cesare Di Mauro wrote: WPython is a CPython 2.6.4 implementation that uses wordcodes instead of bytecodes. A wordcode is a word (16 bits, two bytes, in this case) I suggest you specify the base version (2.6.4) on the project page

Re: [Python-Dev] Scope object (Re: nonlocals() function?)

2010/4/7 Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 04:25:08 pm Cesare Di Mauro wrote: It will certainly. There's MUCH that can be optimized to let CPython squeeze more performance from static analysis (even a gross one) on locals. [...] They are just dummy examples

Re: [Python-Dev] Scope object (Re: nonlocals() function?)

2010/4/6 Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net Greg Ewing greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz writes: Maybe it would be better to deprecate globals() and locals() and replace them with another function called something like scope(). It is useful to distinguish between globals (i.e.,

Re: [Python-Dev] Scope object (Re: nonlocals() function?)

2010/4/6 Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz Cesare Di Mauro wrote: It will certainly. There's MUCH that can be optimized to let CPython squeeze more performance from static analysis (even a gross one) on locals. But can the existing locals() function be implemented in the face

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

. If approved, this model will limit a lot the optimizations that can be implemented to make CPython running faster. Cesare Di Mauro ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

I'm back with some tests that I made with the U-S test suite. 2010/1/30 Scott Dial scott+python-...@scottdial.comscott%2bpython-...@scottdial.com Cesare, just FYI, your Hg repository has lost the execute bits on some files (namely ./configure and ./Parser/asdl_c.py), so it does not quite

Re: [Python-Dev] default of returning None hurts performance?

Hi Antoine, Wpython already addressed this with two new opcodes. RETURN_CONST constant_index which is an equivalent of: LOAD_CONST constant_index RETURN_VALUE and with: CALL_PROC_RETURN_CONST function_arguments, constant_index which is an equivalent of: CALL_FUNCTION function_arguments

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

2010/1/29 s...@pobox.com Cesare I think that wpython as a proof-of-concept have done its work, Cesare showing its potentials. If you haven't alreayd is there any chance you can run the Unladen Swallow performance test suite and post the results? The code is separate from U-S and

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

2010/1/29 s...@pobox.com Cesare ... (you can find the wpython 1.0 final here Cesare http://code.google.com/p/wpython2/downloads/list). I tried downloading it. Something about wpython10.7z and wpython10_fix.7z. What's a 7z file? What tool on my Mac will unpack that? Can I build and

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

2010/1/29 Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net Cesare Di Mauro cesare.di.mauro at gmail.com writes: If python dev community is interested, I can work on a 3.x branch, porting all optimizations I made (and many others that I've planned to implement) one step at the time, in order

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

2010/1/29 s...@pobox.com One strong suggestion for future releases: Please put a top-level directory in your archives. It is annoying to expect that only to have an archive expand into the current directory without creating a directory of its own. I've been burned often enough that I

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

2010/1/29 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com I wouldn't consider changing from bytecode to wordcode uncontroversial - the potential to have an effect on cache hit ratios means it needs to be benchmarked (the U-S performance tests should be helpful there). It's quite strange, but from the tests

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

2010/1/29 Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net Actually, wordcode could allow accesses in the eval loop to be done on aligned words, so as to fetch operands in one step on little-endian CPUs (instead of recombining bytes manually). Regards Antoine. I think that big-endians CPUs can get

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

2010/1/30 exar...@twistedmatrix.com On 10:55 pm, collinwin...@google.com wrote: That people are directly munging CPython bytecode means that CPython should provide a better, more abstract way to do the same thing that's more resistant to these kinds of changes. It might be helpful to

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

2010/1/30 Scott Dial scott+python-...@scottdial.comscott%2bpython-...@scottdial.com Cesare, just FYI, your Hg repository has lost the execute bits on some files (namely ./configure and ./Parser/asdl_c.py), so it does not quite build out-of-the-box. That's probably because I worked on

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

2010/1/26 Collin Winter collinwin...@google.com Hi Cesare, On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.di.ma...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Collin, One more question: is it easy to support more opcodes, or a different opcode structure, in Unladen Swallow project? I assume you're

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

Hi Collin, 2010/1/25 Collin Winter collinwin...@google.com Hi Cesare, On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.di.ma...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Collin IMO it'll be better to make Unladen Swallow project a module, to be installed and used if needed, so demanding to users

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

Hi Collin, One more question: is it easy to support more opcodes, or a different opcode structure, in Unladen Swallow project? Thanks, Cesare ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

Hi Skip For relatively stable code I talk about recent years. My experience with CPython is limited, of course. Cesare 2010/1/26 s...@pobox.com Cesare ... but ceval.c has a relatively stable code ... I believe you are mistaken on several counts: * The names of the functions in

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

2010/1/24 Floris Bruynooghe floris.bruynoo...@gmail.com Introducing C++ is a big step, but I disagree that it means C++ should be allowed in the other CPython code. C++ can be problematic on more obscure platforms (certainly when static initialisers are used) and being able to build a python

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

Hi Collin IMO it'll be better to make Unladen Swallow project a module, to be installed and used if needed, so demanding to users the choice of having it or not. The same way psyco does, indeed. Nowadays it requires too much memory, longer loading time, and fat binaries for not-so-great

Re: [Python-Dev] wpython is back

2009/11/27 Christian Heimes li...@cheimes.de Cesare Di Mauro wrote: You'll find some at page 28 here http://wpython.googlecode.com/files/Beyond%20Bytecode%20-%20A%20Wordcode-based%20Python.pdf .. Mart made more interesting oneshttp://www.mail-archive.com/python-dev@python.org

Re: [Python-Dev] wpython is back

2009/11/27 Christian Heimes li...@cheimes.de Cesare Di Mauro wrote: You'll find some at page 28 here http://wpython.googlecode.com/files/Beyond%20Bytecode%20-%20A%20Wordcode-based%20Python.pdf .. Mart made more interesting oneshttp://www.mail-archive.com/python-dev@python.org

[Python-Dev] wpython is back

Hi Mart I'm back with some news about wpython. I completed all the work that I was committed to do till the end of the year. I made a lot of changes to the code, that I'll report here. First, I added several conditional compilation sections that enable or disable almost every optimization I

Re: [Python-Dev] wpython is back

2009/11/27 Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org It's a Python implementation that uses wordcode instead of bytecode. http://code.google.com/p/wpython/ I don't see any benchmarks though. You'll find some at page 28

Re: [Python-Dev] A wordcode-based Python

at your disposal (thanks for your tests!) Cesare 2009/11/4 Mart Sõmermaa mrts.py...@gmail.com On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.dima...@a-tono.com wrote: Also, I checked out wpython at head to run Unladen Swallow's benchmarks against it, but it refuses to compile

Re: [Python-Dev] special method lookup: how much do we care?

On Sun, May 10, 2009 11:51PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: However lots of developers rely on CPython ref counting as well, no matter how many times they're told not to do that if they want to support alternative interpreters. Cheers, Nick. From socket.py: # Wrapper around platform socket objects.

Re: [Python-Dev] A wordcode-based Python

On Mon, May 11, 2009 10:27PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: Hi Antoine Hi, WPython is a re-implementation of (some parts of) Python, which drops support for bytecode in favour of a wordcode-based model (where a is word is 16 bits wide). This is great! Have you planned to port in to the py3k

Re: [Python-Dev] A wordcode-based Python

Hi Collin On Mon, May 11, 2009 11:14PM, Collin Winter wrote: Hi Cesare, On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.dima...@a-tono.com wrote: At the last PyCon3 at Italy I've presented a new Python implementation, which you'll find at http://code.google.com/p/wpython/ Good

Re: [Python-Dev] A wordcode-based Python

On Thu, May 12, 2009 01:40PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: Hi Cesare, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.dimauro at a-tono.com writes: It was my idea too, but first I need to take a deep look at what parts of code are changed from 2.6 to 3.0. That's because I don't know how much work is required

Re: [Python-Dev] A wordcode-based Python

On Tue, May 12, 2009 05:27 PM, Collin Winter wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 4:45 AM, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.dima...@a-tono.com wrote: Another note. Fredrik Johansson let me note just few minutes ago that I've compiled my sources without PGO optimizations enabled. That's because I used

[Python-Dev] A wordcode-based Python

At the last PyCon3 at Italy I've presented a new Python implementation, which you'll find at http://code.google.com/p/wpython/ WPython is a re-implementation of (some parts of) Python, which drops support for bytecode in favour of a wordcode-based model (where a is word is 16 bits wide). It also

Re: [Python-Dev] pyc files, constant folding and borderline portability issues

On Apr 07, 2009 at 02:10AM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote: On the other hand, I'm with Guido when he wrote it is certainly not right to choose speed over correctness. This is especially a problem for floating point optimizations, and I urge Cesare to be conservative in any f.p.

Re: [Python-Dev] pyc files, constant folding and borderline portability issues

In data 07 aprile 2009 alle ore 17:19:25, s...@pobox.com ha scritto: Cesare The only difference at this time is regards invalid operations, Cesare which will raise exceptions at compile time, not at running Cesare time. Cesare So if you write: Cesare a = 1 / 0

Re: [Python-Dev] pyc files, constant folding and borderline portability issues

, Apr 7, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.dima...@a-tono.com wrote: In data 07 aprile 2009 alle ore 17:19:25, s...@pobox.com ha scritto:     Cesare The only difference at this time is regards invalid operations,     Cesare which will raise exceptions at compile time, not at running

Re: [Python-Dev] pyc files, constant folding and borderline portability issues

On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 07:22PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: In my experience it's better to discover a bug at compile time rather than at running time. That's my point though, which you seem to be ignoring: if the user explicitly writes 1/0 it is not likely to be a bug. That's very different than

Re: [Python-Dev] pyc files, constant folding and borderline portability issues

On Mar 29, 2009 at 05:36PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote: - Issue #5593: code like 1e16+2. is optimized away and its result stored as a constant (again), but the result can vary slightly depending on the internal FPU precision. I would just not bother constant folding

Re: [Python-Dev] pyc files, constant folding and borderline portability issues

On Lun, Apr 6, 2009 16:43, Antoine Pitrou wrote: Cesare Di Mauro cesare.dimauro at a-tono.com writes: def f(): return ['a', ('b', 'c')] * (1 + 2 * 3) [...] With proper constant folding code, both functions can be reduced to a single LOAD_CONST and a RETURN_VALUE (or, definitely, by a single

Re: [Python-Dev] pyc files, constant folding and borderline portability issues

On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 18:57, s...@pobox.com wrote: Cesare At this time with Python 2.6.1 we have these results: Cesare def f(): return 1 + 2 * 3 + 4j ... Cesare def f(): return ['a', ('b', 'c')] * (1 + 2 * 3) Guido can certainly correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the main

Re: [Python-Dev] test_io fails on test_1686475

On Mar, 02 2009 at 00:13AM, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc amaur...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 23:04, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.dima...@a-tono.com wrote: Running the test suite with Python 2.6.1 32 bit (compiled in DEBUG mode with Visual Studio Express Edition 2008) on Vista x64

[Python-Dev] test_io fails on test_1686475

Running the test suite with Python 2.6.1 32 bit (compiled in DEBUG mode with Visual Studio Express Edition 2008) on Vista x64, I've got an assert error: test_1686475 (__main__.StatAttributeTests) ... Assertion failed: (__int64)(int)((in / 1000) - secs_between_epochs) == ((in / 1000) -

Re: [Python-Dev] Challenge: Please break this! [Now with blog post]

On Feb, 24 2009 at 12:11PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: tav tav at espians.com writes: I've fixed this hole in safelite.py, but would be interested to know if there are other non-user-initiated dynamically imported modules? You'd better make __builtins__ read-only, it will

Re: [Python-Dev] Python-acceleration instructions on ARM

On Feb, 11 2009 at 04:11:AM, Benjamin M. Schwartz bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu wrote: Brett Cannon wrote: On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 18:45, Benjamin Schwartz bmsch...@fas.harvard.eduwrote: ... According to ARM [4]: Jazelle RCT can be used to significantly reduce the code bloat associated with

[Python-Dev] Expression optimizations

In peephole.c I noticed some expression optimizations: /* not a is b -- a is not b not a in b -- a not in b not a is not b -- a is b not a not in b -- a in

Re: [Python-Dev] Expression optimizations

On Mar, Feb 10, 2009 at 05:38 PM, Daniel Stutzbach wrote: On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.dima...@a-tono.com wrote: Could it be applyable to other operations as well? So, if I wrote: c = not(a b) the compiler and/or peephole optimizer can generate bytecodes

Re: [Python-Dev] Expression optimizations

On Mar, Feb 10, 2009 06:24 PM, Daniel Stutzbach wrote: On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Steve Holden st...@holdenweb.com wrote: That's true, but the same *could* be said about the existing optimizations for objects that define their own __contains__. No, because there isn't a

Re: [Python-Dev] Expression optimizations

On Mar, Feb 10, 2009 08:15 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote: - Original Message - From: Cesare Di Mauro cesare.dima...@a-tono.com To: Python-Dev python-dev@python.org Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 8:24 AM Subject: [Python-Dev] Expression optimizations In peephole.c I noticed some

Re: [Python-Dev] Expression optimizations

On Mar, Feb 10, 2009 09:42PM, Daniel Stutzbach wrote: On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.dima...@a-tono.comwrote: OK, so I can make assumptions only for built-in types. Yes, but even there you have to be careful of odd corner-cases, such as: nan = float('nan') nan

Re: [Python-Dev] Expression optimizations

: Python-Dev Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Expression optimizations On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Cesare Di Mauro cesare.dima...@a-tono.com wrote: OK, so I can make assumptions only for built-in types. Yes, but even there you have to be careful of odd corner-cases, such as: nan = float('nan

Re: [Python-Dev] Expression optimizations

On Mar, Feb 10, 2009 10:20PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote: [Cesare Di Mauro] I'm playing with the virtual machine and I have some ideas about possibile optimizations that could be applyed. But I need to verify them, so understanding what is possible and what is not, is a primary goal for me

[Python-Dev] Why a STACKADJ(-1) in UNARY_NOT on ceval.c?

Looking at the UNARY_NOT case in ceval.c: case UNARY_NOT: v = TOP(); err = PyObject_IsTrue(v); Py_DECREF(v); if (err == 0) { Py_INCREF(Py_True);

Re: [Python-Dev] progress: compiling python2.5 under msys (specifically but not exclusively under wine) with msvcr80

Have you made some benchmarks like pystone? Cheers, Cesare On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 08:50PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: this is a progress report on compiling python using entirely free software tools, no proprietary compilers or operating systems involved, yet still linking and

Re: [Python-Dev] Add python.exe to PATH environment variable

On 03 sep 2008 at 00:50:13, M.-A. Lemburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There already is a menu entry that starts the Python interpreter on Windows, so why not use that ? Because i need to start Python from folders which have files that define a specific environment. I have several servers and

  1   2   >