bpo-43706: Use PEP 590 vectorcall to speed up enumerate() #25154
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not against such micro-optimization, but I'm not convinced that it's worth it compared to the size of the code to parse arguments: enum_vectorcall() code. If bpo-43447 is implemented, I would be more comfortable to accept such micro-optimization. Right now, it adds many lines of code that should be maintained manually.
The micro-benchmark is measure the creation of the enumerate object, it does not iterate it. I expect for that long sequence, the benefit is not significant. But for short sequence, it is more likely interesting.
| @@ -80,6 +80,45 @@ enum_new_impl(PyTypeObject *type, PyObject *iterable, PyObject *start) | |||
| return (PyObject *)en; | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // TODO: Use AC when bpo-43447 is supported | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would prefer to track these tasks in the bpo rather than directly in the Python source code.
This is expected worry when I try to implement this. I also agree with you. |
|
This PR is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. |
|
Can you please re-run you benchmark? Maybe Python performance changed in the meanwhile. |
Same effect.
|
As mentioned in the issue, this fixes a regression in 3.11. The regression was introduced in pythonGH-25154 (bpo-43706). There were already comments there about how this was too much code for a simple change. This makes it even worse.
https://bugs.python.org/issue43706