-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32.3k
bpo-45829: Specialize BINARY_SUBSCR for __getitem__ implemented in Python. #29592
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
Merged
markshannon
merged 7 commits into
python:main
from
faster-cpython:specialize-for-getitem
Nov 18, 2021
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
4cbbeee
Experimental specialization of BINARY_SUBSCR for __getitem__ implemen…
markshannon 1c5a9c0
Add NEWS
markshannon 2ad803b
Make function static.
markshannon 4eda0e8
Make sure we check type version *before* accessing the function.
markshannon 02f736c
Fix formatting in news item, and clarify code a bit.
markshannon d76c386
Delete unused code.
markshannon 8da92e3
Merge branch 'main' into specialize-for-getitem
markshannon File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Oops, something went wrong.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions
2
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Core and Builtins/2021-11-17-10-14-35.bpo-45829.5Cf6fY.rst
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ | ||
Specialize :opcode:`BINARY_SUBSCR` for classes with a ``__getitem__`` method | ||
implemented in Python |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm guessing it's still worth keeping the logic for oparg counters, just in case we implement a new family that can uses it in the future?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Might as well delete it. It's in the git history.