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.
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
bpo-45636: BINARY_OP (third time's the charm)
#29482
Conversation
I like this approach. Performance is acceptable and should improve with specialization.
|
If you want to schedule another build, you need to add the " |
|
|
|
If you want to schedule another build, you need to add the " |
|
The one buildbot failure looks unrelated, and seems to be affecting other PRs as well. |
This merges all numeric
BINARY_*andINPLACE_*instructions into oneBINARY_OPinstruction. As a consequence, theBINARY_ADDandBINARY_MULTIPLYspecialization families are merged into a newBINARY_OPfamily too.I prefer this new approach over the more complicated one taken in #29418. It simplifies the specialization logic for all operators (for example,
+=and*=now get specialized the same as+and*, basically for free).Performance is unchanged vs
main:https://bugs.python.org/issue45636
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: