gh-119180: Add LOAD_COMMON_CONSTANT opcode#119321
Merged
JelleZijlstra merged 7 commits intopython:mainfrom May 22, 2024
Merged
Conversation
The PEP 649 implementation will require a way to load NotImplementedError from the bytecode. @markshannon suggested implementing this by converting LOAD_ASSERTION_ERROR into a more general mechanism for loading constants. This PR adds this new opcode. I will work on the rest of the implementation of the PEP separately.
JelleZijlstra
requested review from
brettcannon,
ericsnowcurrently,
gvanrossum,
iritkatriel,
markshannon,
ncoghlan and
warsaw
as code owners
30 tasks
JelleZijlstra
commented
May 21, 2024
iritkatriel
reviewed
May 21, 2024
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Core and Builtins/2024-05-21-12-17-02.gh-issue-119180.UNDUb9.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…e-119180.UNDUb9.rst Co-authored-by: Irit Katriel <1055913+iritkatriel@users.noreply.github.com>
Member
Author
|
The previous version broke the JIT. @brandtbucher helped figure out that this is because the common_constants array is empty when the JIT is being compiled. Since there didn't seem to be a simple way to make this work correctly, we decided to simply use a switch in the interpreter code instead. |
carljm
approved these changes
May 21, 2024
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Core and Builtins/2024-05-21-12-17-02.gh-issue-119180.UNDUb9.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…e-119180.UNDUb9.rst
gvanrossum
reviewed
May 21, 2024
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Core and Builtins/2024-05-21-12-17-02.gh-issue-119180.UNDUb9.rst
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
estyxx
pushed a commit
to estyxx/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2024
The PEP 649 implementation will require a way to load NotImplementedError from the bytecode. @markshannon suggested implementing this by converting LOAD_ASSERTION_ERROR into a more general mechanism for loading constants. This PR adds this new opcode. I will work on the rest of the implementation of the PEP separately. Co-authored-by: Irit Katriel <1055913+iritkatriel@users.noreply.github.com>
estyxx
pushed a commit
to estyxx/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2024
PR python#119321 added a comment about the magic number bump but did not actually apply the new magic number.
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
The PEP 649 implementation will require a way to load NotImplementedError
from the bytecode. @markshannon suggested implementing this by converting
LOAD_ASSERTION_ERROR into a more general mechanism for loading constants.
This PR adds this new opcode. I will work on the rest of the implementation
of the PEP separately.
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--119321.org.readthedocs.build/