As I'm reading the PEP 590 reference implementation, it strikes me how
similar it is to https://bugs.python.org/issue29259
The main difference is that bpo-29259 has a per-class pointer
tp_fastcall instead of a per-object pointer. But actually, the PEP 590
reference implementation does not make much use of the per-object
pointer: for all classes except "type", the vectorcall wrapper is the
same for all objects of a given type.
One thing that bpo-29259 did not realize is that existing optimizations
could be dropped in favor of using tp_fastcall. For example, bpo-29259
has code like
if (PyFunction_Check(callable)) {
return _PyFunction_FastCallKeywords(...);
}
if (PyCFunction_Check(callable)) {
return _PyCFunction_FastCallKeywords(...);
}
else if (PyType_HasFeature(..., Py_TPFLAGS_HAVE_FASTCALL) ...)
but the first 2 branches are superfluous given the third.
Anyway, this is just putting PEP 590 a bit in perspective. It doesn't
say anything about the merits of PEP 590.
Jeroen.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
