Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34k
gh-134584: Eliminate redundant refcounting from _BINARY_OP_ADD_UNICODE#135817
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.
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
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Changes from all commits
d5afe1546b423fc901079ea112a5d95aee9File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Jump to
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe also add
to make sure this is the op that's actually generated?
Should we also test for
_POP_TOP_UNICODE?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In this code, It will be replaced to
_POP_TOP_NOPbecause_POP_TOP_UNICODEwill be optimized to_POP_TOP_NOP.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yup, do you think it makes sense to test
_POP_TOP_UNICODEseparately? That is, the case when it is not optimized to_POP_TOP_NOP? (not sure how difficult it'll be to come up with a test case though)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have a test for that in my original PR already.