Yury Selivanov <yseliva...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> The gist seems to be to have extra opcodes that only work for certain > situations (e.g. INT_BINARY_ADD). In a hot function we can rewrite opcodes > with their specialized counterpart. The new opcode contains a guard that > rewrites itself back if the guard fails (and then it stays unoptimized). This is also roughly what I suggested in https://bugs.python.org/msg379333. Except that I don't think it's necessary to add new opcodes. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue42115> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
