Josiah Carlson wrote: > In the integer case, it reminds me of James Knight's tagged integer > patch to 2.3 [1]. If using long exclusively is 50% slower, why not try > the improved speed approach?
looks like GvR was -1000 on this idea at the time, though... > Also, depending on the objects, one may consider a few other tagged > objects, like perhaps None, True, and False (they could all be special > values with a single tag), or even just use 31/63 bits for the tagged > integer value, with a 1 in the lowest bit signifying it as a tagged integer. iirc, my pytte1 experiment used tagged objects for integers and single- character strings, which resulting in considerable speedups for the (small set of) benchmarks I used. (on the other hand, the dominating speedups in pytte1 were "true" GC, and call-site caching combined with streamlined method lookup. if we really want to speed things up, we should probably start with call-site caching and (explicit?) method inlining). </F> _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
