Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-05-15 Thread Cesare Di Mauro
2016-02-17 12:04 GMT+01:00 Antoine Pitrou : > Demur Rumed gmail.com> writes: > > I've personally benchmarked this fork with positive results. > > I'm skeptical of claims like this. What did you benchmark exactly, and with > which results? > I don't think changing the opcode encoding per se will b

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-05-15 Thread Cesare Di Mauro
2016-02-15 8:14 GMT+01:00 Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev < python-dev@python.org>: > Despite the name (and inspiration), my fork has very little to do with > WPython. I'm just focused on simpler (hopefully = faster) fetch code; he > started with that, but ended up going the exact opposite direction

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-05-15 Thread Cesare Di Mauro
2016-02-15 1:20 GMT+01:00 Demur Rumed : > Saw recent discussion: > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-February/143013.html > > I remember trying WPython; it was fast. Unfortunately it feels it came at > the wrong time when development was invested in getting py3k out the door. > No

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-02-17 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Demur Rumed gmail.com> writes: > I've personally benchmarked this fork with positive results. I'm skeptical of claims like this. What did you benchmark exactly, and with which results? I don't think changing the opcode encoding per se will bring any large benefit... Regards Antoine. _

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-02-14 Thread Greg Ewing
Guido van Rossum wrote: An unfortunate issue however is that many projects seem to make a hobby of hacking bytecode. All those projects would have to be totally rewritten in order to support the new wordcode format Maybe this argues for having an assembly-language-like intermediate form between

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-02-14 Thread Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev
On Feb 14, 2016, at 19:05, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > I think it's probably too soon to discuss on python-dev, but I do > think that something like this could be attempted in 3.6 or (more > likely) 3.7, if it really is faster. > > An unfortunate issue however is that many projects seem to make

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-02-14 Thread Maciej Fijalkowski
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 4:05 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > I think it's probably too soon to discuss on python-dev, but I do > think that something like this could be attempted in 3.6 or (more > likely) 3.7, if it really is faster. > > An unfortunate issue however is that many projects seem to mak

Re: [Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-02-14 Thread Guido van Rossum
I think it's probably too soon to discuss on python-dev, but I do think that something like this could be attempted in 3.6 or (more likely) 3.7, if it really is faster. An unfortunate issue however is that many projects seem to make a hobby of hacking bytecode. All those projects would have to be

[Python-Dev] Wordcode v2

2016-02-14 Thread Demur Rumed
Saw recent discussion: https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-February/143013.html I remember trying WPython; it was fast. Unfortunately it feels it came at the wrong time when development was invested in getting py3k out the door. It also had a lot of other ideas like *_INT instruction