A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-February/033673.html below:

[Python-Dev] Bytecode analysis

[Python-Dev] Bytecode analysisNeil Schemenauer nas@python.ca
Tue, 25 Feb 2003 15:50:37 -0800
Christian Tismer wrote:
> Where you really can save some time is to shortcut some
> of the very short opcodes to not jump back to the ticker
> counting code, but into a shorter circle.

2.2 -> 2.3 includes this optimization for some opcodes.

> Not trying to demoralize you completely, but there are
> limits about what can be gathered by optimizing the
> interpreter loop. There was once the p2c project, which
> gave an overall improvement of 25-40 percent, by totally
> removing the interpreter loop.

Yes, but p2c was probably not nice to the icache.  I doubt 25-40% is
an upper bound.  Memory bandwidth really sucks now (relatively
speaking).  I think reference counting is now starting to look like a
smart design (in terms of performance). :-)

  Neil



RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4