why does dead code costs time?

Tim Roberts timr at probo.com
Thu Dec 6 06:20:07 CET 2012


Bruno Dupuis <python.ml.bruno.dupuis at lisael.org> wrote:

>On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 05:40:51PM +0100, Bruno Dupuis wrote:
> 
>> Good point! I didn't even noticed that. It's weird... Maybe the
>> difference comes from a peehole optim on f which is not possible on g as
>> g is to complex.
>
>Neil, you were right, thanks. I patched peehole.c to remove this optim, and
>now the figures are the same. I investigate to find out why the latter
>function is not optimized the same way (and if it can be, I'll propose a
>patch for that)

At the risk of being labeled a prude, please be careful about spelling (and
pronouncing) the whole word "peephole".  The word as you have spelled it
here (twice) is a vulgarity.

Now, I'm all in favor of the occasional vulgarity, but if this is a
misunderstanding, you could find yourself as the butt of some awkward jokes
at some future optimization conference...
-- 
Tim Roberts, timr at probo.com
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.



More information about the Python-list mailing list