Re: [Python-ideas] Bytecode JIT
This is literally PyPy. There's little reason for something like this to end up in official CPython, at least for now. -- Ryan (ライアン) Yoko Shimomura, ryo (supercell/EGOIST), Hiroyuki Sawano >> everyone elsehttp://refi64.com On Jul 1, 2017 at 5:53 PM, <Soni L. <fakedme+py@gmail.com>> wrote: On 2017-07-01 07:34 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
Let's say that you do. Given how short it is, it would just get inlined. Your call of mysum ("a", "b") would indeed not use IADD, nor would it be a call. It would potentially not invoke any operators, but instead get replaced with "ab". When you have a tracing JIT, you can do away with a lot of overhead. You can inline functions, variables, do away with typechecks, and many other things. This holds true even if that JIT never emits a single byte of machine code. _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
On 2017-07-01 11:57 PM, rymg19@gmail.com wrote:
This is literally PyPy. There's little reason for something like this to end up in official CPython, at least for now.
It's literally not PyPy. PyPy's internal bytecode, for one, does have typechecks. And PyPy emits machine code, which is not something I wanna deal with because you shouldn't need to write a C compiler AND a whole assembly backend just to port python to a new CPU architecture. A C compiler should be enough.
On 2017-07-01 11:57 PM, rymg19@gmail.com wrote:
This is literally PyPy. There's little reason for something like this to end up in official CPython, at least for now.
It's literally not PyPy. PyPy's internal bytecode, for one, does have typechecks. And PyPy emits machine code, which is not something I wanna deal with because you shouldn't need to write a C compiler AND a whole assembly backend just to port python to a new CPU architecture. A C compiler should be enough.
participants (2)
-
rymg19＠gmail.com -
Soni L.