Skip to content

bpo-46841: Fix BINARY_OP's handling of inline caches #31671

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 4, 2022
Merged

bpo-46841: Fix BINARY_OP's handling of inline caches #31671

merged 2 commits into from
Mar 4, 2022

Conversation

brandtbucher
Copy link
Member

@brandtbucher brandtbucher commented Mar 3, 2022 •
edited by bedevere-bot
Loading

@brandtbucher brandtbucher mentioned this pull request Mar 3, 2022
Closed
26 tasks
@markshannon
Copy link
Member

Changes LGTM.

OOI, how did you find this?

Would it be feasible to add a regression test?
@brandtbucher
Copy link
Member Author

OOI, how did you find this?

After the LOAD_FAST__LOAD_ATTR_INSTANCE_VALUE issue on #31640, I went through both these files and reviewed our use of instruction pointers. #31664 came out of that too.

Would it be feasible to add a regression test?

Not until we can dis quickened code. Once that happens, I can go through and add a new suite of test cases for all of our adaptive/specialized/super instructions.

Don't worry, it will be less like test_dis.py and more like test_peepholer.py. ;)
@brandtbucher brandtbucher merged commit c4d2d57 into python:main Mar 4, 2022
@brandtbucher brandtbucher mentioned this pull request Apr 10, 2022
Closed
@brandtbucher brandtbucher deleted the binary-op-fix branch July 21, 2022 19:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

4 participants

@brandtbucher @markshannon @the-knights-who-say-ni @bedevere-bot