Message 307572 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub , and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author	pitrou
Recipients	Demur Rumed, Mark.Shannon, benjamin.peterson, christian.heimes, mark.dickinson, nascheme, ncoghlan, pitrou, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, trent
Date	2017年12月04日.15:49:17
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<87ca1904-a2cf-15da-47e9-bed56639f52e@free.fr>
In-reply-to	<1512400908.08.0.213398074469.issue17611@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>

Content
Le 04/12/2017 à 16:21, Mark Shannon a écrit : > > My reasons for preferring the finally-block duplication approach is that it keeps the interpreter simpler and minimises the amount work done when no exception is raised. As demonstrated, the increase in the static size of the bytecode is negligible. Whichever approach wins at the end, I would like it to reuse the tests I wrote to check that no stack size explosion happens when combining or juxtaposing several control flow constructs.

Content

Le 04/12/2017 à 16:21, Mark Shannon a écrit :
> 
> My reasons for preferring the finally-block duplication approach is that it keeps the interpreter simpler and minimises the amount work done when no exception is raised. As demonstrated, the increase in the static size of the bytecode is negligible.
Whichever approach wins at the end, I would like it to reuse the tests I
wrote to check that no stack size explosion happens when combining or
juxtaposing several control flow constructs.

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2017年12月04日 15:49:17	pitrou	set	recipients: + pitrou, nascheme, rhettinger, mark.dickinson, ncoghlan, christian.heimes, benjamin.peterson, trent, Mark.Shannon, serhiy.storchaka, Demur Rumed
2017年12月04日 15:49:17	pitrou	link	issue17611 messages
2017年12月04日 15:49:17	pitrou	create

homepage