homepage

While they are obvious speedup on microbenchmarks, it doesn't speedup "macro" benchmarks from performance as much as I expected.
The changes required in typeobject.c to support "tp_new or tp_fastnew" and "tp_init or tp_fastinit" are large and very complex. I'm not sure that my code is correct. update_one_slot(), add_operators() and PyType_Ready() functions are complex beast, sadly almost not documented, except such comment...
 /* The __new__ wrapper is not a wrapper descriptor,
 so must be special-cased differently.
 If we don't do this, creating an instance will
 always use slot_tp_new which will look up
 __new__ in the MRO which will call tp_new_wrapper
 which will look through the base classes looking
 for a static base and call its tp_new (usually
 PyType_GenericNew), after performing various
 sanity checks and constructing a new argument
 list. Cut all that nonsense short -- this speeds
 up instance creation tremendously. */
 specific = (void *)type->tp_new;
 /* XXX I'm not 100% sure that there isn't a hole
 in this reasoning that requires additional
 sanity checks. I'll buy the first person to
 point out a bug in this reasoning a beer. */
How am I supposed to be confident in front of such coment :-D
I expect that calling a functions (tp_call) is a more common operation than instanciating a new object (tp_new + tp_init). So I don't think that the overall change is worth it.
For all these reaons, I close the issue as REJECTED.