Skip to content

gh-109256: allocate opcode IDs for internal opcodes in their own range #109269

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
iritkatriel merged 5 commits into from
Sep 12, 2023
Merged

gh-109256: allocate opcode IDs for internal opcodes in their own range #109269

iritkatriel merged 5 commits into from
Sep 12, 2023

Conversation

@iritkatriel
Copy link
Member

@iritkatriel iritkatriel commented Sep 11, 2023 •
edited by bedevere-app bot
Loading

@iritkatriel iritkatriel changed the title gh-09256: allocate opcode IDs for internal opcodes in their own range gh-109256: allocate opcode IDs for internal opcodes in their own range Sep 11, 2023
@bedevere-app bedevere-app bot mentioned this pull request Sep 11, 2023
Closed
markshannon
markshannon reviewed Sep 11, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@markshannon markshannon left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, in general.

test_dis will need fixing up, of course.

As you need to fix test_dis anyway could you make RESUME opcode 1? If it is to have a special number, it might as well be memorable.

    map_op(1, "RESUME")
    next_opcode = 2

@iritkatriel
Copy link
Member Author

iritkatriel commented Sep 11, 2023

Looks good, in general.

test_dis will need fixing up, of course.

As you need to fix test_dis anyway could you make RESUME opcode 1? If it is to have a special number, it might as well be memorable.

    map_op(1, "RESUME")
    next_opcode = 2

RESUME has an arg though, so I thought it should be after HAVE_ARGUMENT? Unless we want to special case it.

@brettcannon brettcannon removed their request for review September 11, 2023 22:48
@markshannon markshannon self-requested a review September 12, 2023 08:26
markshannon
markshannon approved these changes Sep 12, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@markshannon markshannon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good. Should save a fair bit of future churn.
Merge conflicts need fixing, obviously.

@markshannon markshannon mentioned this pull request Sep 12, 2023
Closed
@iritkatriel iritkatriel enabled auto-merge (squash) September 12, 2023 10:12
@iritkatriel iritkatriel merged commit 8b55adf into python:main Sep 12, 2023
@gvanrossum gvanrossum mentioned this pull request Sep 12, 2023
Merged
vstinner pushed a commit to vstinner/cpython that referenced this pull request Sep 13, 2023
@iritkatriel @vstinner
pythongh-109256: allocate opcode IDs for internal opcodes in their ow…
547afcc 
…n range (python#109269)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@markshannon markshannon markshannon approved these changes

@ericsnowcurrently ericsnowcurrently Awaiting requested review from ericsnowcurrently ericsnowcurrently is a code owner

@ncoghlan ncoghlan Awaiting requested review from ncoghlan ncoghlan is a code owner

@warsaw warsaw Awaiting requested review from warsaw warsaw is a code owner

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@iritkatriel @markshannon