Message395516
Yes. Simpler is good.
I think it will also be better for performance:
In general, we don't know what X is in `from Y import X`. It could be a module or anything else.
However, if we are accessing an attribute it is quite likely to be a module or class.
For `X` defined by `from Y import X`, `X` is likely to be a module, class, function, or some sort of constant like a string, int or Enum.
If it is a string, int or function then it is rare to call a method on it, so we can ignore that case.
Calling methods on an Enum constant is probably not very common either (I'm guessing here)
For a module, `LOAD_ATTR; CALL_FUNCTION` is clearly better than `LOAD_METHOD; CALL_METHOD`.
For a class, specializing `LOAD_ATTR` is no more complex than `LOAD_METHOD`, probably simpler.
So, for a class `LOAD_ATTR; CALL_FUNCTION` is no worse than `LOAD_METHOD; CALL_METHOD`, and might be better.
Overall, it looks like `X.foo()` when `X` is defiend by `from Y import X` is best as `LOAD_ATTR; CALL_FUNCTION` not `LOAD_METHOD; CALL_METHOD`. |
|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2021-06-10 08:37:15 | Mark.Shannon | set | recipients:
+ Mark.Shannon, BTaskaya |
| 2021-06-10 08:37:15 | Mark.Shannon | set | messageid: <[email protected]> |
| 2021-06-10 08:37:15 | Mark.Shannon | link | issue44313 messages |
| 2021-06-10 08:37:14 | Mark.Shannon | create | |
|