[Python-Dev] Why is Bytecode the way it is?

[Christopher T King]

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004, Guido van Rossum wrote:

> At the cost of an extra pointer dereference and jump, and usually for
> naught (the uses of LOAD_CONST not in a return statement must
> certainly vastly outnumber those in return statements).

Hm, I didn't think the extra three or so assembler opcodes needed would 
make that big of an impact on the loop, given all the other things it 
does.  Guess it was a just bad idea :)