On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 00:05:58 +0000, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 14:58:15 -0700, James Stroud wrote:
>
>> I was staring at a segment of code that looked like this today:
>>
>> for something in stuff[x:y]:
>> whatever(something)
>>
>> and was wondering if the compiler really made a copy of the slice from
>> stuff as the code seems to suggest, or does it find some way to produce
>> an iterator without the need to make a copy (if stuff is a built-in
>> sequence type)?
>
> The compiler can't "optimize" this as it would change the semantics.
> There's no way for the compiler to tell if this copy really is
> "needless". `whatever()` may change `stuff[i]` where `i` is in `x:y` and
> this may lead to different results wether it iterates over a copy or the
> original.
In *general* the compiler can't tell, but in specific cases it could. A
(hypothetical) optimizing compiler would tell the difference between:
for item in alist[1:5]:
print item # no possible side-effects
for item in alist[1:5]:
function(alist, item) # there might be side-effects
for item in alist[1:5]:
alist.append(item) # side-effects DON'T matter
for i, item in enumerate(alist[1:5]):
alist[i+1] = function(item) # side-effects DO matter
Of course this is all besides the point, since no such optimizing
compiler exists today, at least not for CPython. Any volunteers?
--
Steven.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
