Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Nagle wrote: > >> Many cases are easy. If a smart compiler sees >> >> for i in range(n) : >> ... # something >> >> and there are no other assignments to "i", then it's clear that >> "i" can be represented as an integer, without "boxing" into a >> general object. > > How is it clear that `i` is restricted to integers? That works only if > you assume `range` refers to the built-in `range()` function. So the > smart compiler has to check all possible control flows up to this point > and be sure `range` was not bound to something different. > That is, of course, exactly what a smart compiler would do. Only nowadays it would quite possibly do it just-in-time (so I suppose you might call it the run-time, though the boundary is continually getting more blurred) rather than as the result of static analysis, so it would *know* that the built-in generator had been called.
regards Steve -- Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC/Ltd http://www.holdenweb.com Skype: holdenweb http://del.icio.us/steve.holden Recent Ramblings http://holdenweb.blogspot.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
