Kirill Balunov <kirill.balu...@gmail.com> added the comment:
Small risk of breaking is a fair point (maybe some FutureWarning with new
__getattr__ PEP 562?). I've checked several packages:
---
vstinner/bytecode:: uses:
@staticmethod
def _has_jump(opcode):
return (opcode in _opcode.hasjrel
or opcode in _opcode.hasjabs)
---
maynard:: defines them as sets and does not rely on opcode module.
all_jumps = absolute_jumps | relative_jumps
---
numba:: converts them to frozensets:
JREL_OPS = frozenset(dis.hasjrel)
JABS_OPS = frozenset(dis.hasjabs)
JUMP_OPS = JREL_OPS | JABS_OPS
---
codetransfromer:: uses:
absjmp = opcode in hasjabs
reljmp = opcode in hasjrel
---
anotherassembler.py:: uses
elif opcode in hasjrel or opcode in hasjabs:
---
byteplay:: converts them to set:
hasjrel = set(Opcode(x) for x in opcode.hasjrel)
hasjabs = set(Opcode(x) for x in opcode.hasjabs)
hasjump = hasjrel.union(hasjabs)
---
byterun:: uses:
elif byteCode in dis.hasjrel:
arg = f.f_lasti + intArg
elif byteCode in dis.hasjabs:
arg = intArg
In fact, all of the above indicated does not mean anything, but I have not
found cases of hasjrel+hasjabs.
Despite the fact that they are small, on average, with sets I gain 5-6x
speed-up.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue33326>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
