Yury Selivanov added the comment: Hi Guido, I'll try to update the patch soon.
> but I worry that there's a catch (e.g. memory cost that doesn't become > apparent until you have a large program, or minimal speedup on realistic > code). Here's an excerpt from my email [1] to Python-dev on memory footprint: To measure the max/average memory impact, I tuned my code to optimize *every* code object on *first* run. Then I ran the entire Python test suite. Python test suite + standard library both contain around 72395 code objects, which required 20Mb of memory for caches. The test process consumed around 400Mb of memory. Thus, the absolute worst case scenario, the overhead is about 5%. [1] https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-February/143025.html ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue26219> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
