Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> added the comment:

As Raymond noted though, some of the block stack fiddling doesn't make sense 
until after the bytecode has already been generated. It's OK to have multiple 
optimisers at different layers, each taking care of the elements that are best 
suited to that level.

And yes, an updated patch against the current tip would be good. Of my earlier 
review comments, the ones I'd still like to see addressed are:
- finish clearing out the now redundant special casing of None/True/False
- separating out the non-AST related compiler tweaks (i.e. 3b and 3c and the 
associated test changes) into their own patch (including moving the relevant 
tests into a separate @cpython_only test case)

I'm still not 100% convinced on that latter set of changes, but I don't 
want my further pondering on those to hold up the rest of the patch. (they 
probably make sense, it's just that the AST level changes are much easier to 
review than the ones right down at the bytecode generation level - reviewing 
the latter means getting back up to speed on precisely how the block stack 
works and it will be a while before I get around to doing that. It's just one 
of those things where the details matter, but diving that deep into the 
compiler is such a rare occurrence that I have to give myself a refresher 
course each time it happens).

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue11549>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to