[Python-Dev] Store x Load x --> DupStore

Brett C. bac at OCF.Berkeley.EDU
Sun Feb 20 20:41:03 CET 2005

Michael Hudson wrote:
> "Phillip J. Eby" <pje at telecommunity.com> writes:
>>And whatever happened to CALL_METHOD?
> It didn't work as an optimization, as far as I remember.  I think the
> patch is on SF somewhere.  Or is a branch in CVS?  Oh, it's patch
> #709744.
>>Do we need a tp_callmethod that takes an argument array, length, and
>>keywords, so that we can skip instancemethod allocation in the
>>common case of calling a method directly?
> Hmm, didn't think of that, and I don't think it's how the CALL_ATTR
> attempt worked.  I presume it would need to take a method name too :)

CALL_ATTR basically replaced ``LOAD_ATTR; CALL_FUNCTION`` with a single opcode. 
  Idea was that the function creation by the LOAD_ATTR was a wasted step so 
might as well just skip it and call the method directly.

Problem was the work required to support both classic and new-style classes. 
Now I have not looked at the code since it was written back at PyCon 2003 and I 
was a total newbie to the core's C code at that point and I think Thomas said 
it had been two years since he did any major core hacking.  In other words it 
could possibly have been done better.  =)


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list