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

2012-07-20 Thread Raymond Hettinger
On Jul 18, 2012, at 3:30 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > - Eugene Toder's patch to add an AST optimisation step to the compiler > chain (http://bugs.python.org/issue11549) (I've asked Eugene about > this patch more recently and his current thought is that subsequent > improvements to the peephole optim

Re: [Python-Dev] cpython: Issue #15168: Move importlb.test to test.test_importlib.

2012-07-20 Thread Andrew Svetlov
+1 On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:25 PM, R. David Murray wrote: > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 22:12:26 +0200, Antoine Pitrou > wrote: >> On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 20:49:03 +0200 (CEST) >> brett.cannon wrote: >> > diff --git a/Lib/importlib/test/__init__.py >> > b/Lib/test/test_importlib/__init__.py >> > rename

Re: [Python-Dev] cpython: Issue #15168: Move importlb.test to test.test_importlib.

2012-07-20 Thread R. David Murray
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 22:12:26 +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 20:49:03 +0200 (CEST) > brett.cannon wrote: > > diff --git a/Lib/importlib/test/__init__.py > > b/Lib/test/test_importlib/__init__.py > > rename from Lib/importlib/test/__init__.py > > rename to Lib/test/test_importl

Re: [Python-Dev] cpython: Issue #15168: Move importlb.test to test.test_importlib.

2012-07-20 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 20:49:03 +0200 (CEST) brett.cannon wrote: > diff --git a/Lib/importlib/test/__init__.py > b/Lib/test/test_importlib/__init__.py > rename from Lib/importlib/test/__init__.py > rename to Lib/test/test_importlib/__init__.py > --- a/Lib/importlib/test/__init__.py > +++ b/Lib/test/

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

2012-07-20 Thread Maciej Fijalkowski
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Michael Foord wrote: > > On 17 Jul 2012, at 23:04, mar...@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. T

[Python-Dev] Summary of Python tracker Issues

2012-07-20 Thread Python tracker
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2012-07-13 - 2012-07-20) Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/ To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue. Do NOT respond to this message. Issues counts and deltas: open3528 ( +8) closed 23658 (+55) total 27186 (+63) Open issues wit

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

2012-07-20 Thread Jeffrey Yasskin
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Victor Stinner wrote: >> It's the JIT compiler of Unladen Swallow that "failed"; in >> my understanding because LLVM is crap (i.e. it is slow, memory-consuming, >> and buggy) - as a low-level virtual machine; it may be ok as a compiler >> backend (but I still think

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

2012-07-20 Thread Alex Gaynor
That's not, strictly speaking, true. Mozilla added a method-JIT (Jaegermonkey) and then added another one (IonMonkey) because their tracing JIT (Tracemonkey) was bad. There's no fundamental reason that tracing has to only cover loops, indeed PyPy's tracing has been generalized to compile individua

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

2012-07-20 Thread Michael Foord
On 17 Jul 2012, at 23:04, mar...@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 si