X-FeedAbuse: http://nntpfeed.proxad.net/abuse.pl feeded by 195.154.70.45 Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!nntpfeed.proxad.net!news.redatomik.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.118 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.76; '*S*': 0.00; 'objects,': 0.09; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'all,': 0.19; 'work,': 0.20; 'memory': 0.22; '15,': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'am,': 0.29; 'message- id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; "d'aprano": 0.31; 'steven': 0.31; 'probably': 0.32; 'fri,': 0.33; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'method': 0.36; 'possible': 0.36; 'being': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'itself': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'how': 0.40; 'removing': 0.60; 'filling': 0.78; '2015': 0.84 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=JpOaa35UiF4jPMPKJAaeF7Cm0JpJJGcOA3eEaEEgsWo=; b=nJX4b97zWiMwweKiG9aTj67ufBKW0rm0DawObe6WIKejVybbKkrmQRYrJ3xLagEqzi bEd4Qq7tBV7ht0pzKsKvmU074i9jYlVGvQ3rzOdSWfwtcHS5Ej58QP9W5leYEjvB/MFx Ermx4ivwHN7idBBfbx+cT2562tije9/96LacPvI4nFXfrEPtx9TmVoFyCD2lR3qsdtGZ tuoigAlKxo+u7lwulrJ0FFLpsuA+PS5JPCFpypplpNyKeye2En24Kh17Kv83NC+AT3fA 6u+NUYHwMVNweMjS6eRMnVXdpJa90bN1c+I146tmBGQQX8RNMCQRLeKkMlI76HHKTbIP T0/Q== X-Received: by 10.43.127.1 with SMTP id gy1mr5666665icc.94.1431702086530; Fri, 15 May 2015 08:01:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5555e9de$0$13007$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> References: <7JN4x.37133$Q41.15375@fx25.am4> <6w35x.645690$I97.19867@fx31.am4> <874mnfunpn.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <87bnhmgqrx.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <87382yglmy.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <5555e9de$0$13007$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> From: Ian Kelly Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 09:00:46 -0600 Subject: Re: Building CPython To: Python Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 9 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1431702099 news.xs4all.nl 2897 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:47708 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:90679 On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > How much time would it save? Probably very little. After all, unless the > method call itself did bugger-all work, the time to create the method > object is probably insignificant. But it's a possible optimization. An interesting alternative (if it's not already being done) might be to maintain a limited free-list of method objects, removing the need to allocate memory for one before filling it in with data.