2016-01-14 11:32 GMT+01:00 Franklin? Lee firstname.lastname@example.org:
(FAT Python: http://faster-cpython.readthedocs.org/fat_python.html)
FYI I moved the optimizer into a new project at GitHub to ease contributions and experiments: https://github.com/haypo/fatoptimizer
Running tests work on Python 3.4, but running optimized code required a patched Python 3.6 (http://hg.python.org/sandbox/fatpython repository which includes all patches).
FAT Python uses guards to check whether a global name (for example, the name for a function) has changed its value. Idea: If you know exactly which function will be called, you can also optimize based on the properties of that function.
You need a guard on the function. The fat module provides such guard: https://fatoptimizer.readthedocs.org/en/latest/fat.html#GuardFunc
Right now, it only watch for func.__code__. I'm not sure that it's enought. A function has many attributes which can change its behaviour if they are modified: __defaults__, __closure__, __dict__, __globals__, __kwdefaults__, __module__ (?), __name__ (?), __qualname__ (?).
According to Eli Bendersky's 2012 blog post (which might be outdated), a function call with keyword arguments is potentially slower than one with only positional arguments.
Yeah, ext_do_call() has to create a temporary dictionary, while calling a function only with indexed parameters can avoid *completly* the creation of any temporary object. PyEval_EvalFrameEx() takes a stack (array of objects) which is used to pass parameters from CALL_FUNCTION, but only for pure Python functions.
So maybe, in a function which uses FAT Python's guards, we can replace some of the keyworded-calls to global function with positional-only calls. It might be a micro-optimization, but it's one that the Python programmer doesn't have to worry about.
It looks like you have a plan, and I think that you can implement the optimization without changing the Python semantics.
- Is it possible to correctly determine, for a given function, which
positional parameters have which names?
I think so. Just "read" the function prototype no? Such info is available in AST.
- Is it possible to change a function object's named parameters some
time after it's created (and inspected)?
What do you think?
PS: I didn't feel like this was appropriate for either of Victor's running PEP threads, and the third milestone thread is in the previous month's archives, so I thought that making a new thread would be best.
Yeah, it's better to start a separated thread, thanks.