Skip to content

Optimizing FOR_ITER bytecode #91432

Closed
Closed
Optimizing FOR_ITER bytecode#91432
Labels
3.11only security fixesinterpreter-core(Objects, Python, Grammar, and Parser dirs)performancePerformance or resource usage

Description

@sweeneyde
sweeneyde
opened on Apr 10, 2022

We can execute one less opcode in every iteration (except for the first) of every for-loop by changing from

    GET_ITER
top:
    FOR_ITER
    [body]
    JUMP_BACKWARDS(top)
cleanup:
end:

to

    GET_ITER
    JUMP_FORWARD(bottom)
body:
    [body]
bottom:
    FOR_END(body)
cleanup:
end:

This was suggested by @markshannon here, but it appears to be similar in spirit to Loop Inversion.

There seems to be a small (on the order of 1%) benefit, but I imagine the benefit will be magnified after any specialization.

Activity

  1. sweeneyde
    added
    interpreter-core(Objects, Python, Grammar, and Parser dirs)
    3.11only security fixes
    performancePerformance or resource usage
    on Apr 11, 2022

  2. markshannon commented on Apr 11, 2022

    @markshannon
    markshannon
    on Apr 11, 2022
    Member

    What about?

    top:
    FOR_ITER
body:
    [body]
    END_ITER body
cleanup:
end:

  3. markshannon commented on Apr 11, 2022

    @markshannon
    markshannon
    on Apr 11, 2022
    Member

    Also, we would like to decouple the sense (jumps on exhaustion like FOR_ITER, or jumps when not exhausted like END_FOR) and the direction of the jump.

  4. markshannon commented on Apr 11, 2022

    @markshannon
    markshannon
    on Apr 11, 2022
    Member

    If you only want one sense of jump, and to avoid the extra backwards branch, this should work (provided we have both a forward and backward version)

    top:
    END_FOR body
    JUMP cleanup
body:
    [body]
    END_FOR body
cleanup:
end:

  5. sweeneyde commented on Apr 11, 2022

    @sweeneyde
    sweeneyde
    on Apr 11, 2022
    MemberAuthor

    What is the advantage of having a forward version or a jump-if-exhausted version when the vast majority of executions of the opcode will be (backwards, jump-if-not-exhausted)? Is that symmetry worth the extra code in ceval loop?

  6. sweeneyde commented on Apr 12, 2022

    @sweeneyde
    sweeneyde
    on Apr 12, 2022
    MemberAuthor

    Version with a JUMP_FORWARD to FOR_END, no FOR_ITER: #70016

    Version with both a FOR_ITER and a FOR_END: #91472

  7. serhiy-storchaka commented on Apr 12, 2022

    @serhiy-storchaka
    serhiy-storchaka
    on Apr 12, 2022
    Member

    I proposed a similar idea (opcode FOR_NEXT) in the discussion for #71314. At that time it was rejected because it makes the relation between Python code and the generated bytecode less straightforward. Seems the bar is lower now, so I considered to return to this.

    I have not implemented it because:

    1. It would require rewriting the code for the frame.f_lineno setter, which was already too complicated and brittle.
    2. It would negatively affect the idiom: for x in a: break.
    3. The benefit was unclear.

  8. sweeneyde commented on Apr 12, 2022

    @sweeneyde
    sweeneyde
    on Apr 12, 2022
    MemberAuthor

    What if we specialized JUMP_BACKWARD to FOR_END_ADAPTIVE when targeted at FOR_ITER?

    Then we get the same old readable unquickened bytecode but reduce the number of dispatches per for-loop for quickened bytecode? It would add cache entries to JUMP_BACKWARD, but perhaps we could eventually limit that to only the targeted-at-FOR_ITER cases.

  9. sweeneyde commented on Apr 20, 2022

    @sweeneyde
    sweeneyde
    on Apr 20, 2022 · Hidden as outdated
    Author

  10. sweeneyde commented on Apr 21, 2022

    @sweeneyde
    sweeneyde
    on Apr 21, 2022
    MemberAuthor

    After merging up with main and re-running everything, I get these results:

    Microbenchmarks:

    Details
    Benchmark main_micro for_iter_micro jump_backward_micro
    for_range 20 8.05 ns 6.54 ns: 1.23x faster 5.62 ns: 1.43x faster
    for_range 200 6.33 ns 4.28 ns: 1.48x faster 4.00 ns: 1.58x faster
    for_range 2_000 10.7 ns 3.97 ns: 2.68x faster 3.83 ns: 2.79x faster
    for_range 20_000 11.3 ns 3.90 ns: 2.89x faster 3.78 ns: 2.97x faster
    for_range 200_000 11.4 ns 3.90 ns: 2.93x faster 3.79 ns: 3.02x faster
    for_list 20 6.71 ns 5.97 ns: 1.12x faster 5.64 ns: 1.19x faster
    for_list 200 5.41 ns 4.63 ns: 1.17x faster 4.31 ns: 1.25x faster
    for_list 2_000 5.16 ns 4.54 ns: 1.14x faster 4.07 ns: 1.27x faster
    for_list 20_000 5.23 ns 4.57 ns: 1.14x faster 4.12 ns: 1.27x faster
    for_list 200_000 5.86 ns 5.09 ns: 1.15x faster 4.70 ns: 1.25x faster
    Geometric mean (ref) 1.55x faster 1.67x faster

    Pyperformance

    All together in one table:

    Details
    Benchmark main_pyperformance for_iter_pyperformance for_end_pyperformance
    chameleon 6.29 ms 6.39 ms: 1.02x slower 6.17 ms: 1.02x faster
    chaos 71.1 ms 70.3 ms: 1.01x faster 72.8 ms: 1.02x slower
    deltablue 3.69 ms not significant 3.74 ms: 1.01x slower
    django_template 36.7 ms not significant 37.9 ms: 1.03x slower
    dulwich_log 76.9 ms not significant 76.1 ms: 1.01x faster
    fannkuch 391 ms 369 ms: 1.06x faster 387 ms: 1.01x faster
    float 74.6 ms 70.2 ms: 1.06x faster 71.2 ms: 1.05x faster
    go 141 ms 137 ms: 1.03x faster 137 ms: 1.03x faster
    hexiom 6.40 ms 6.26 ms: 1.02x faster 6.24 ms: 1.03x faster
    html5lib 65.3 ms 64.2 ms: 1.02x faster 63.5 ms: 1.03x faster
    json_loads 27.6 us not significant 27.1 us: 1.02x faster
    logging_format 7.15 us 7.25 us: 1.01x slower 7.24 us: 1.01x slower
    logging_simple 6.39 us 6.52 us: 1.02x slower not significant
    mako 9.78 ms 9.51 ms: 1.03x faster 9.33 ms: 1.05x faster
    meteor_contest 105 ms not significant 107 ms: 1.02x slower
    nbody 90.3 ms 83.4 ms: 1.08x faster not significant
    nqueens 81.0 ms 79.2 ms: 1.02x faster 83.1 ms: 1.03x slower
    pathlib 19.3 ms 19.1 ms: 1.01x faster 18.9 ms: 1.02x faster
    pickle_dict 28.9 us 28.3 us: 1.02x faster 28.4 us: 1.02x faster
    pidigits 184 ms not significant 182 ms: 1.01x faster
    pyflate 409 ms 417 ms: 1.02x slower not significant
    python_startup 8.84 ms 8.81 ms: 1.00x faster not significant
    python_startup_no_site 6.63 ms 6.62 ms: 1.00x faster 6.61 ms: 1.00x faster
    raytrace 297 ms 303 ms: 1.02x slower 305 ms: 1.03x slower
    regex_compile 139 ms 136 ms: 1.02x faster 137 ms: 1.01x faster
    regex_dna 196 ms 200 ms: 1.02x slower not significant
    regex_effbot 2.72 ms 2.89 ms: 1.06x slower 2.79 ms: 1.03x slower
    regex_v8 22.1 ms 22.5 ms: 1.02x slower 21.5 ms: 1.03x faster
    richards 50.2 ms 52.1 ms: 1.04x slower 51.8 ms: 1.03x slower
    scimark_fft 335 ms 326 ms: 1.03x faster 328 ms: 1.02x faster
    scimark_lu 98.9 ms not significant 101 ms: 1.02x slower
    scimark_monte_carlo 66.4 ms 64.2 ms: 1.03x faster 63.9 ms: 1.04x faster
    scimark_sor 109 ms 107 ms: 1.02x faster 107 ms: 1.02x faster
    scimark_sparse_mat_mult 5.09 ms 4.62 ms: 1.10x faster 4.29 ms: 1.19x faster
    spectral_norm 93.6 ms 90.4 ms: 1.04x faster not significant
    sqlalchemy_declarative 147 ms 144 ms: 1.02x faster 145 ms: 1.01x faster
    telco 6.34 ms 6.14 ms: 1.03x faster 6.41 ms: 1.01x slower
    tornado_http 178 ms 173 ms: 1.03x faster 175 ms: 1.02x faster
    unpack_sequence 41.9 ns 43.5 ns: 1.04x slower 44.9 ns: 1.07x slower
    unpickle_pure_python 230 us 234 us: 1.01x slower not significant
    xml_etree_parse 157 ms 160 ms: 1.02x slower 159 ms: 1.02x slower
    xml_etree_generate 74.1 ms not significant 73.4 ms: 1.01x faster
    Geometric mean (ref) 1.01x faster 1.00x faster

    Just looking at the FOR_ITER specialization:

    Details

    FOR_ITER specialization:

    Slower (12):
- regex_effbot: 2.72 ms +- 0.07 ms -> 2.89 ms +- 0.09 ms: 1.06x slower
- unpack_sequence: 41.9 ns +- 1.5 ns -> 43.5 ns +- 1.9 ns: 1.04x slower
- richards: 50.2 ms +- 2.4 ms -> 52.1 ms +- 2.8 ms: 1.04x slower
- xml_etree_parse: 157 ms +- 6 ms -> 160 ms +- 3 ms: 1.02x slower
- logging_simple: 6.39 us +- 0.12 us -> 6.52 us +- 0.33 us: 1.02x slower
- pyflate: 409 ms +- 7 ms -> 417 ms +- 5 ms: 1.02x slower
- raytrace: 297 ms +- 8 ms -> 303 ms +- 8 ms: 1.02x slower
- regex_v8: 22.1 ms +- 0.3 ms -> 22.5 ms +- 0.8 ms: 1.02x slower
- regex_dna: 196 ms +- 2 ms -> 200 ms +- 6 ms: 1.02x slower
- chameleon: 6.29 ms +- 0.18 ms -> 6.39 ms +- 0.17 ms: 1.02x slower
- logging_format: 7.15 us +- 0.17 us -> 7.25 us +- 0.16 us: 1.01x slower
- unpickle_pure_python: 230 us +- 4 us -> 234 us +- 4 us: 1.01x slower

Faster (22):
- scimark_sparse_mat_mult: 5.09 ms +- 0.25 ms -> 4.62 ms +- 0.18 ms: 1.10x faster
- nbody: 90.3 ms +- 1.8 ms -> 83.4 ms +- 2.9 ms: 1.08x faster
- float: 74.6 ms +- 1.3 ms -> 70.2 ms +- 1.4 ms: 1.06x faster
- fannkuch: 391 ms +- 5 ms -> 369 ms +- 5 ms: 1.06x faster
- spectral_norm: 93.6 ms +- 1.1 ms -> 90.4 ms +- 1.7 ms: 1.04x faster
- scimark_monte_carlo: 66.4 ms +- 2.0 ms -> 64.2 ms +- 1.0 ms: 1.03x faster
- telco: 6.34 ms +- 0.16 ms -> 6.14 ms +- 0.13 ms: 1.03x faster
- scimark_fft: 335 ms +- 13 ms -> 326 ms +- 9 ms: 1.03x faster
- mako: 9.78 ms +- 0.12 ms -> 9.51 ms +- 0.13 ms: 1.03x faster
- go: 141 ms +- 12 ms -> 137 ms +- 3 ms: 1.03x faster
- tornado_http: 178 ms +- 7 ms -> 173 ms +- 7 ms: 1.03x faster
- regex_compile: 139 ms +- 3 ms -> 136 ms +- 2 ms: 1.02x faster
- nqueens: 81.0 ms +- 1.9 ms -> 79.2 ms +- 2.5 ms: 1.02x faster
- hexiom: 6.40 ms +- 0.10 ms -> 6.26 ms +- 0.16 ms: 1.02x faster
- pickle_dict: 28.9 us +- 0.7 us -> 28.3 us +- 0.8 us: 1.02x faster
- sqlalchemy_declarative: 147 ms +- 6 ms -> 144 ms +- 4 ms: 1.02x faster
- scimark_sor: 109 ms +- 1 ms -> 107 ms +- 1 ms: 1.02x faster
- html5lib: 65.3 ms +- 2.6 ms -> 64.2 ms +- 2.6 ms: 1.02x faster
- chaos: 71.1 ms +- 2.4 ms -> 70.3 ms +- 2.2 ms: 1.01x faster
- pathlib: 19.3 ms +- 0.4 ms -> 19.1 ms +- 0.4 ms: 1.01x faster
- python_startup: 8.84 ms +- 0.07 ms -> 8.81 ms +- 0.07 ms: 1.00x faster
- python_startup_no_site: 6.63 ms +- 0.05 ms -> 6.62 ms +- 0.07 ms: 1.00x faster

Benchmark hidden because not significant (25): 2to3, crypto_pyaes, deltablue, django_template, dulwich_log, json_dumps, json_loads, logging_silent, meteor_contest, pickle, pickle_list, pickle_pure_python, pidigits, scimark_lu, sqlalchemy_imperative, sqlite_synth, sympy_expand, sympy_integrate, sympy_sum, sympy_str, unpickle, unpickle_list, xml_etree_iterparse, xml_etree_generate, xml_etree_process

Geometric mean: 1.01x faster

    Just looking at the JUMP_BACKWARD specialization:

    Details

    JUMP_BACKWARD specialization:

    Slower (13):
- unpack_sequence: 41.9 ns +- 1.5 ns -> 44.9 ns +- 1.1 ns: 1.07x slower
- django_template: 36.7 ms +- 2.4 ms -> 37.9 ms +- 0.9 ms: 1.03x slower
- richards: 50.2 ms +- 2.4 ms -> 51.8 ms +- 3.2 ms: 1.03x slower
- regex_effbot: 2.72 ms +- 0.07 ms -> 2.79 ms +- 0.04 ms: 1.03x slower
- raytrace: 297 ms +- 8 ms -> 305 ms +- 6 ms: 1.03x slower
- nqueens: 81.0 ms +- 1.9 ms -> 83.1 ms +- 1.3 ms: 1.03x slower
- chaos: 71.1 ms +- 2.4 ms -> 72.8 ms +- 2.0 ms: 1.02x slower
- meteor_contest: 105 ms +- 3 ms -> 107 ms +- 2 ms: 1.02x slower
- scimark_lu: 98.9 ms +- 2.1 ms -> 101 ms +- 2 ms: 1.02x slower
- xml_etree_parse: 157 ms +- 6 ms -> 159 ms +- 3 ms: 1.02x slower
- logging_format: 7.15 us +- 0.17 us -> 7.24 us +- 0.29 us: 1.01x slower
- deltablue: 3.69 ms +- 0.11 ms -> 3.74 ms +- 0.09 ms: 1.01x slower
- telco: 6.34 ms +- 0.16 ms -> 6.41 ms +- 0.18 ms: 1.01x slower

Faster (22):
- scimark_sparse_mat_mult: 5.09 ms +- 0.25 ms -> 4.29 ms +- 0.18 ms: 1.19x faster
- mako: 9.78 ms +- 0.12 ms -> 9.33 ms +- 0.11 ms: 1.05x faster
- float: 74.6 ms +- 1.3 ms -> 71.2 ms +- 1.3 ms: 1.05x faster
- scimark_monte_carlo: 66.4 ms +- 2.0 ms -> 63.9 ms +- 1.0 ms: 1.04x faster
- go: 141 ms +- 12 ms -> 137 ms +- 3 ms: 1.03x faster
- regex_v8: 22.1 ms +- 0.3 ms -> 21.5 ms +- 0.2 ms: 1.03x faster
- html5lib: 65.3 ms +- 2.6 ms -> 63.5 ms +- 2.7 ms: 1.03x faster
- hexiom: 6.40 ms +- 0.10 ms -> 6.24 ms +- 0.11 ms: 1.03x faster
- scimark_fft: 335 ms +- 13 ms -> 328 ms +- 11 ms: 1.02x faster
- pathlib: 19.3 ms +- 0.4 ms -> 18.9 ms +- 0.4 ms: 1.02x faster
- chameleon: 6.29 ms +- 0.18 ms -> 6.17 ms +- 0.14 ms: 1.02x faster
- pickle_dict: 28.9 us +- 0.7 us -> 28.4 us +- 0.6 us: 1.02x faster
- json_loads: 27.6 us +- 1.2 us -> 27.1 us +- 1.3 us: 1.02x faster
- scimark_sor: 109 ms +- 1 ms -> 107 ms +- 2 ms: 1.02x faster
- tornado_http: 178 ms +- 7 ms -> 175 ms +- 6 ms: 1.02x faster
- sqlalchemy_declarative: 147 ms +- 6 ms -> 145 ms +- 4 ms: 1.01x faster
- pidigits: 184 ms +- 1 ms -> 182 ms +- 1 ms: 1.01x faster
- regex_compile: 139 ms +- 3 ms -> 137 ms +- 2 ms: 1.01x faster
- dulwich_log: 76.9 ms +- 1.2 ms -> 76.1 ms +- 1.6 ms: 1.01x faster
- xml_etree_generate: 74.1 ms +- 0.8 ms -> 73.4 ms +- 1.0 ms: 1.01x faster
- fannkuch: 391 ms +- 5 ms -> 387 ms +- 7 ms: 1.01x faster
- python_startup_no_site: 6.63 ms +- 0.05 ms -> 6.61 ms +- 0.06 ms: 1.00x faster

Benchmark hidden because not significant (24): 2to3, crypto_pyaes, json_dumps, logging_silent, logging_simple, nbody, pickle, pickle_list, pickle_pure_python, pyflate, python_startup, regex_dna, spectral_norm, sqlalchemy_imperative, sqlite_synth, sympy_expand, sympy_integrate, sympy_sum, sympy_str, unpickle, unpickle_list, unpickle_pure_python, xml_etree_iterparse, xml_etree_process

Geometric mean: 1.00x faster

    Comparing the two:

    Details

    Specializing FOR_ITER --> Specializing JUMP_BACKWARD

    Slower (15):
- nbody: 83.4 ms +- 2.9 ms -> 90.4 ms +- 2.1 ms: 1.08x slower
- fannkuch: 369 ms +- 5 ms -> 387 ms +- 7 ms: 1.05x slower
- nqueens: 79.2 ms +- 2.5 ms -> 83.1 ms +- 1.3 ms: 1.05x slower
- spectral_norm: 90.4 ms +- 1.7 ms -> 94.5 ms +- 8.0 ms: 1.05x slower
- telco: 6.14 ms +- 0.13 ms -> 6.41 ms +- 0.18 ms: 1.04x slower
- chaos: 70.3 ms +- 2.2 ms -> 72.8 ms +- 2.0 ms: 1.04x slower
- unpack_sequence: 43.5 ns +- 1.9 ns -> 44.9 ns +- 1.1 ns: 1.03x slower
- scimark_lu: 98.5 ms +- 1.7 ms -> 101 ms +- 2 ms: 1.02x slower
- meteor_contest: 105 ms +- 2 ms -> 107 ms +- 2 ms: 1.02x slower
- django_template: 37.3 ms +- 1.5 ms -> 37.9 ms +- 0.9 ms: 1.02x slower
- float: 70.2 ms +- 1.4 ms -> 71.2 ms +- 1.3 ms: 1.01x slower
- sympy_sum: 170 ms +- 3 ms -> 172 ms +- 6 ms: 1.01x slower
- regex_compile: 136 ms +- 2 ms -> 137 ms +- 2 ms: 1.01x slower
- raytrace: 303 ms +- 8 ms -> 305 ms +- 6 ms: 1.01x slower
- python_startup: 8.81 ms +- 0.07 ms -> 8.84 ms +- 0.07 ms: 1.00x slower

Faster (14):
- scimark_sparse_mat_mult: 4.62 ms +- 0.18 ms -> 4.29 ms +- 0.18 ms: 1.08x faster
- regex_v8: 22.5 ms +- 0.8 ms -> 21.5 ms +- 0.2 ms: 1.05x faster
- chameleon: 6.39 ms +- 0.17 ms -> 6.17 ms +- 0.14 ms: 1.04x faster
- regex_effbot: 2.89 ms +- 0.09 ms -> 2.79 ms +- 0.04 ms: 1.03x faster
- unpickle: 16.1 us +- 0.7 us -> 15.5 us +- 1.2 us: 1.03x faster
- pyflate: 417 ms +- 5 ms -> 407 ms +- 6 ms: 1.02x faster
- regex_dna: 200 ms +- 6 ms -> 195 ms +- 3 ms: 1.02x faster
- logging_simple: 6.52 us +- 0.33 us -> 6.38 us +- 0.13 us: 1.02x faster
- mako: 9.51 ms +- 0.13 ms -> 9.33 ms +- 0.11 ms: 1.02x faster
- json_dumps: 12.8 ms +- 0.4 ms -> 12.6 ms +- 0.3 ms: 1.01x faster
- xml_etree_generate: 74.3 ms +- 0.9 ms -> 73.4 ms +- 1.0 ms: 1.01x faster
- pathlib: 19.1 ms +- 0.4 ms -> 18.9 ms +- 0.4 ms: 1.01x faster
- dulwich_log: 77.0 ms +- 1.6 ms -> 76.1 ms +- 1.6 ms: 1.01x faster
- unpickle_pure_python: 234 us +- 4 us -> 231 us +- 6 us: 1.01x faster

Benchmark hidden because not significant (30): 2to3, crypto_pyaes, deltablue, go, hexiom, html5lib, json_loads, logging_format, logging_silent, pickle, pickle_dict, pickle_list, pickle_pure_python, pidigits, python_startup_no_site, richards, scimark_fft, scimark_monte_carlo, scimark_sor, sqlalchemy_declarative, sqlalchemy_imperative, sqlite_synth, sympy_expand, sympy_integrate, sympy_str, tornado_http, unpickle_list, xml_etree_parse, xml_etree_iterparse, xml_etree_process

Geometric mean: 1.00x slower
  11. sweeneyde
    changed the title [-]Replace JUMP+FOR_ITER with FOR_END[/-] [+]Optimizing FOR_ITER[/+] on Apr 24, 2022

  12. sweeneyde commented on Apr 24, 2022

    @sweeneyde
    sweeneyde
    on Apr 24, 2022
    MemberAuthor

    Changing the issue title to be more general and include specializations without any FOR_END.

  13. gahabana commented on Jun 2, 2022

    @gahabana
    gahabana
    on Jun 2, 2022

    3.11 beta has much slower for loop with range then 3.10 or 3.9

    this piece of code:

    i: int
for i in range (0,100_000_000):
    ...

    executes 20% slower with 3.11-dev, 3.11.0b1 as well as 3.11.0b3

    I am not sure if this is related to above discussion

  14. sweeneyde commented on Jun 2, 2022

    @sweeneyde
    sweeneyde
    on Jun 2, 2022
    MemberAuthor

    @gahabana No changes have been made relating to this issue, so please open a new issue about a particular performance regression. Make sure to describe your operating system and how you installed python.

  15. sweeneyde
    changed the title [-]Optimizing FOR_ITER[/-] [+]Optimizing FOR_ITER bytecode[/+] on Jun 2, 2022

  16. sweeneyde commented on Jun 12, 2022

    @sweeneyde
    sweeneyde
    on Jun 12, 2022
    MemberAuthor

    Some more microbenchmark (empty for-loop) results for other FOR_ITER specializations:

    • Can get lists about 1.1x faster
    • Can get ranges between 1.5x and 3x faster by combining the STORE_FAST
    • Dict items can get about 1.5x faster by combining the UNPACK_SEQUENCE(2)
    • Enumerate can get about 1.25x faster by combining the UNPACK_SEQUENCE(2)
    • Map can get about 1.2x faster by focusing on the one-iterable case
    • I couldn't manage to get looping over sets any faster.
    • I got loops over tuples about 1.08x faster

    I collected opcode stats here a couple months ago, and I can't imagine much has changed since then.

    If we manage to merge some version of #91713 (specializing list and range), I would think to do dict items and enumerate next.

  17. markshannon
    added a commit that references this issue on Jun 21, 2022

    GH-91432: Specialize FOR_ITER (GH-91713)

    5fcfdd8
  18. serhiy-storchaka
    added a commit that references this issue on Jun 26, 2022

    Revert 30935 defer bpo45162 to 312 (#94285)

    1ffde3e
  19. brandtbucher
    added a commit that references this issue on Sep 7, 2022

    GH-91432: Remove the iterator_exhausted_no_error label (GH-96517)

    0d04b8d

  20. sweeneyde commented on Sep 9, 2022

    @sweeneyde
    sweeneyde
    on Sep 9, 2022
    MemberAuthor

    I'll go ahead and close this -- generators and such can be a separate issue.

  21. sweeneyde
    closed this as completedon Sep 9, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    3.11only security fixesinterpreter-core(Objects, Python, Grammar, and Parser dirs)performancePerformance or resource usage

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions