cache handler names #207
Merged
cache handler names #207
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
izeigerman
approved these changes
May 8, 2020
m2cgen/interpreters/utils.py
Outdated
| @@ -7,3 +10,13 @@ | |||
| def get_file_content(path): | |||
| with open(path) as f: | |||
| return f.read() | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| @lru_cache(maxsize=16) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it make sense to put a larger number here to accommodate for future AST extension? I'd even suggest to make it unbounded if possible, since the total number of expressions in AST will always be pretty limited. Otherwise perhaps we can set it to something like 32.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think that for the sake of efficiency it should be as small as possible. I even thought to set maxsize=8.
For future AST extension we can easily update the maxsize here while adding new expressions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, my concern is that one should always keep this number on the back of their minds when adding new expression. Why do you say it should be as small as possible though? The cache is super cheap in this case, isn't it? It's if we just had a map with 16 pointer to string pairs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, my concern is that one should always keep this number on the back of their minds when adding new expression.
Agree! It is not so convenient. Driving in a such direction we can simply replace two these functions with manual dict.
But according to the source code, lru_cache is based on linked list, not hashmap
https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/81a5fc38e81b424869f4710f48e9371dfa2d3b77/Lib/functools.py#L781
So I believe size matters here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, maybe I'm overoptimizing things. I've proposed new changes to this PR so that we won't have to care about keeping maxsize actual. Now it has enough capacity automatically. Please let me know what you think about it.
But it still contributes due to the number of calls 🙂 |
|
This is a pretty deep analysis, well done 👍 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This method (now function to not overcomplicate the code with handling of two decorators) is used very extensively. So the profit of caching it is obvious.
For example,