So code that depends on iterating through bytecode via HAS_ARG is going to break...
Darn it. :/ -- Ryan [ERROR]: Your autotools build scripts are 200 lines longer than your program. Something’s wrong. http://kirbyfan64.github.io/ On Apr 13, 2016 4:44 PM, "Victor Stinner" <victor.stin...@gmail.com> wrote: > Le mercredi 13 avril 2016, Ryan Gonzalez <rym...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> What is the value of HAS_ARG going to be now? >> > > I asked Demur to keep HAS_ARG(). Not really for backward compatibility, > but for the dis module: to keep a nice assembler. There are also debug > traces in ceval.c which use it. > > For ceval.c, we might use HAS_ARG() to micro-optimize oparg=0 (hardcode 0 > rather than reading the bytecode) for operators with no argument. Or maybe > it's completly useless :-) > > Victor >
_______________________________________________ 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
