[issue5375] Unified locals/consts array + register-based instructions

[Terry J. Reedy]

Terry J. Reedy  added the comment:

This a type of feature request and such a change would only go into a new 
version. Given the absence of response from djc, perhaps this should be closed 
as languishing-postponed?

--
nosy: +terry.reedy
versions: +Python 3.3 -Python 2.7, Python 3.1

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue5375] Unified locals/consts array + register-based instructions

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

Dirkjan Ochtman  added the comment:

Yeah, I probably won't work on this anytime soon. I think this has also become 
less interesting as pypy has made progress.

--

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue5375] Unified locals/consts array + register-based instructions

[Antoine Pitrou]

Changes by Antoine Pitrou :


--
resolution:  -> postponed
status: open -> closed

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue5375] Unified locals/consts array + register-based instructions

[Antoine Pitrou]

New submission from Antoine Pitrou :

There is no patch here, this entry is just a reminder of some of the
ideas that have been suggested to experiment with ways to speedup the
Python VM (djc, who is nosied, has said he'd be willing to try working
on it):

- unify the local variables and constants arrays (this costs a copy of
the constants array at each frame creation, but it should be negligible
since frames are reused and the copy can probably be a dumb memcpy)
- devise new instructions, or a whole new instruction set, which takes
its arguments from this array

As a simple way to experiment, one could start with a new instruction
named e.g. BINARY_ADD_FAST which would take one 16-bit arg, whose 8
upper bits would be the index of the first argument, and whose 8 lower
bits would be the index of the second argument. The result would be
pushed on top of the stack.

It could also be measured whether having a special value (255) to mean
"pop the argument off the pop of the stack" gives negative (because of
overhead) or positive (because of less bytecode) results.

--
components: Interpreter Core
messages: 82756
nosy: collinwinter, djc, jyasskin, pitrou
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Unified locals/consts array + register-based instructions
type: performance
versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.1

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue5375] Unified locals/consts array + register-based instructions

[Martin v. Löwis]

Martin v. Löwis  added the comment:

Please don't store such information in the bug tracker. If you think you
need public storage of it, consider using the wiki.

OTOH, I'm skeptical why a reminder is necessary in the first place: if
this is a project that interests you, you surely won't forget about it,
right?

--
nosy: +loewis

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue5375] Unified locals/consts array + register-based instructions

[Antoine Pitrou]

Antoine Pitrou  added the comment:

> OTOH, I'm skeptical why a reminder is necessary in the first place: if
> this is a project that interests you, you surely won't forget about it,
> right?

The reason I don't just store it somewhere inside my head is that it's a
collective reminder :-). Also, djc (Dirkjan Ochtman) asked me to open an
entry as he wants to try to work on it.

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com