RetroSearch Browse

Mon Feb 21 10:00:11 CET 2005 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-February/051739.html

Michael Hudson <mwh at python.net> writes:

>> Because there are CO_MAXBLOCKS * 12 bytes in there for the block
>> stack.  If there was no need for that, frames could perhaps be
>> allocated via pymalloc.  They only have around 100 bytes or so in
>> them, apart from the blockstack and locals/value stack.
>
> What I'm trying is allocating the blockstack separately and see if two
> pymallocs are cheaper than one malloc.

This makes no difference at all, of course -- once timeit or pystone
gets going the code path that actually allocates a new frame as
opposed to popping one off the free list simply never gets executed.
Duh!

Cheers,
mwh
(and despite what the sigmonster implies, I wasn't drunk last night :)

-- 
  This is an off-the-top-of-the-head-and-not-quite-sober suggestion,
  so is probably technically laughable.  I'll see how embarassed I
  feel tomorrow morning.            -- Patrick Gosling, ucam.comp.misc

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-February/051739.html below:

[Python-Dev] Store x Load x --> DupStore