Message263775
> FYI, there is a proposition about constructing arguments tuple and dict in bytecode instead of ceval.c. This will significantly simplify CALL_FUNCTION (which will get just one optional tuple and one optional dict). Likely this idea will be implemented after changing to wordcode. Wordcode is the issue #26647. Do you have a reference to the more efficient implementation of CALL_FUNCTION? I recall vaguely this idea. -- It was also proposed to pass keyword arguments as positional arguments: replace func(a=1, b=2) with func(1, 2) with "def func(a, b): ...". But this optimization requires something like FAT Python to disable the optimization if the function is replaced at runtime. This optimization is more complex, maybe it's not worth. | |
Date | User | Action | Args | 2016-04-19 21:28:36 | vstinner | set | recipients: + vstinner, python-dev, martin.panter, serhiy.storchaka, yselivanov, josh.r, llllllllll | 2016-04-19 21:28:36 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1461101316.66.0.532562367455.issue26802@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> | 2016-04-19 21:28:36 | vstinner | link | issue26802 messages | 2016-04-19 21:28:36 | vstinner | create | | |