reorganize, extend function call optimizations

[mwhudson]

BPO	876193
Nosy	@mwhudson, @akuchling, @birkenfeld, @devdanzin, @jeremyhylton
Files	function-optimization-reorg.diff: mwh's patch Support "bpo-" in Misc/NEWS #1

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = 'https://github.com/mwhudson'
closed_at = <Date 2010-02-22.22:07:26.094>
created_at = <Date 2004-01-13.16:35:24.000>
labels = ['interpreter-core', 'performance']
title = 'reorganize, extend function call optimizations'
updated_at = <Date 2010-02-22.22:11:04.638>
user = 'https://github.com/mwhudson'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2010-02-22.22:11:04.638>
actor = 'Jeremy.Hylton'
assignee = 'mwh'
closed = True
closed_date = <Date 2010-02-22.22:07:26.094>
closer = 'mwh'
components = ['Interpreter Core']
creation = <Date 2004-01-13.16:35:24.000>
creator = 'mwh'
dependencies = []
files = ['5787']
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 876193
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 9.0
messages = ['45281', '45282', '45283', '45284', '45285', '82014', '99834', '99851', '99853']
nosy_count = 7.0
nosy_names = ['mwh', 'jhylton', 'akuchling', 'richard', 'georg.brandl', 'ajaksu2', 'Jeremy.Hylton']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'out of date'
stage = None
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = 'performance'
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue876193'
versions = ['Python 2.4']

[mwhudson]

This patch rejigs the optimizations for certain kinds
of function call -- easy Python functions, METH_O
functions and so on.

It also extends the "easy Python function" optimization
to handle default arguments.

It adds a tp_pythoncall field to type objects, with the
signature of the ceval.c local static function do_call
(which is now exported and called PyEval_DoCall). This
field is filled out in the function and method
constructors appropriately.

What do you think? Makes little performance difference
(0.5% improvement in pystone on one machine), but I
think I prefer this arrangement. It generalizes
better, for one thing.

The patch is a little untidy at present -- some code
duplication and it utterly mangles the function call
statistics code -- but these should be shallow.

[jhylton]

Logged In: YES
user_id=31392

Is this patch still relevant? Should it wait until 2.5?

[mwhudson]

Logged In: YES
user_id=6656

Well, nothing has invalidated it. I think I still would like to see it
go in, but don't have strong opinions either way. What do you
think of it? :-)

It should certainly wait for 2.5.

[birkenfeld]

Logged In: YES
user_id=1188172

2.5 is nearing, so what to do?

[richard]

Logged In: YES
user_id=6405

This patch is far too out of date to apply to 2.5

[devdanzin]

Can the patch be updated?

[akuchling]

Is this patch still of interest?

[mwhudson]

I guess not.

[jeremyhylton]

Might be worth looking at for 2.x anyway.