A RetroSearch Logo

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

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-July/046010.html below:

[Python-Dev] Why is Bytecode the way it is?

[Python-Dev] Why is Bytecode the way it is? [Python-Dev] Why is Bytecode the way it is?Greg Ewing greg at cosc.canterbury.ac.nz
Fri Jul 9 03:17:02 CEST 2004
Skip Montanaro <skip at pobox.com>:

> When I looked at this a long time ago it I seem to recall that roughly 60%
> of the opcodes executed did nothing more than copy values to or from the
> stack (of course, pushes and pops are some of the more efficient opcodes in
> the instruction set).  A three-address machine model would reduce this data
> movement substantially.

But it would only be worth doing if the cost of these data
movements is a substantial fraction of the whole execution
time. Does anyone have any timings to suggest that they
are?

Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+
University of Canterbury,	   | A citizen of NewZealandCorp, a	  |
Christchurch, New Zealand	   | wholly-owned subsidiary of USA Inc.  |
greg at cosc.canterbury.ac.nz	   +--------------------------------------+
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

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