On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettinger at gmail.com> wrote: > Today, there was a significant check-in to the peephole optimizer that I > think should be reverted: > http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/14205d0fee45/ +1 I was going to comment on the corresponding issue #11244 more or less supporting Raymond's arguments. There is no end of optimization ideas that can be implemented in peephole optimizer. I know this first hand having implemented several of those that have been ultimately rejected. At the end of the day, peephole optimizer is a hack that predates proper AST design. There is no need to continue squeezing out last drops of juice from 10-year old technology when much better approach is available with the modern design.
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