[Python-ideas] Bytecode JIT

rymg19 at gmail.com rymg19 at gmail.com
Sat Jul 1 22:57:52 EDT 2017

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

On Jul 1, 2017 at 5:53 PM, <Soni L. <fakedme+py at gmail.com>> wrote:

On 2017-07-01 07:34 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> Let's say that you have a function "def mysum (x; y): return x+y", do
> you always want to use your new IADD instruction here? What if I call
> mysum ("a", "b")?
> Victor

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 at python.org
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20170701/5c032527/attachment.html>

More information about the Python-ideas mailing list