[Python-Dev] new bytecode results

[Andrew McNamara]

>The general problem with the ceval switch statement is that it
>is too big. Adding new opcodes will only make it bigger, so I doubt
>that much can be gained in general by trying to come up with new
>do-everything-in-one-opcode cases.
[...]
>The last point is probably compiler dependent. GCC has the tendency
>to use the same layout for the assembler code as you use in the
>C source code, so placing often used code close to the top
>results in better locality (at least on my machines).

My experience with gcc (on x86) is that it uses a lookup table
for contiguous switch statements rather than a long chain of
compares/branches. A quick look at the assembler output from ceval.c
suggests it's using a lookup table. What architecture did you observe
this on?

-- 
Andrew McNamara, Senior Developer, Object Craft
http://www.object-craft.com.au/