RetroSearch Browse

Fri Jul 20 18:50:44 CEST 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-July/121054.html

On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Michael Foord <fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk>wrote:

>
> On 17 Jul 2012, at 23:04, martin at v.loewis.de wrote:
>
> >> [snip...]
> >
> >> I would like to use a JIT to generate specialized functions for a
> >> combinaison of arguments types.
> >
> > I think history has moved past specializing JITs. Tracing JITs are the
> > status quo; they provide specialization as a side effect.
> >
>
> Mozilla implemented a method-JIT (compile whole methods) on top of their
> tracing JIT because a tracing JIT only optimises part of your code (only in
> loops and only if executed more times than the threshold) and there are
> further performance improvements to be had. So tracing JITs are not the
> *whole* of the state of the art.
>
> Michael
>

I'm sorry michael but you're like a 100th person I have to explain this to.
The pure reason that mozilla did not make a tracing JIT work does not mean
the entire approach is horribly doomed as many people would like to assume.
The reasons are multiple, but a lot of them are connected to poor
engineering (for example the part inherited from adobe is notoriously bad,
have a look if you want).

Cheers,
fijal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20120720/9f0ba343/attachment.html>

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-July/121054.html below:

[Python-Dev] A new JIT compiler for a faster CPython?