On Jan 21, 2010, at 11:32 PM, Reid Kleckner wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 5:07 PM, David Malcolm <dmalc...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> To what extent would it be possible to use (conditionally) use full
>> ahead-of-time compilation as well as JIT?
>
> It would be possible to do this, but it doesn't have nearly the same
> benefits as JIT compilation, as Alex mentioned. You could do a static
> compilation of all code objects in a .pyc to LLVM IR and compile that
> to a .so that you load at runtime, but it just eliminates the
> interpreter overhead. That is significant, and I think someone should
> try it, but I think there are far more wins to be had using feedback.
Wouldn't it be cool if you could run your app (say, with a torture test data
set), let the JIT do its magic, then say:
"Yes, that's what I want, now save the JIT info as it was in that run
and use it as the JIT profile every time you run the app but turn off any JIT
profiling during those runs."
Get rid of the compiler overhead (with .so trick from quoted message) ,
and the runtime overhead, but keep the JIT-ness that it already figured out was
best.
S
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
