python / python/cpython

Constant-fold f-strings with constant fields in the CFG optimizer

未关闭
#154,910 0 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

interpreter-core performance type-feature
主要语言
Python
星标
77.2k
派生
35.9k
PR 合并指标
PR 指标待抓取

描述

Feature or enhancement

Proposal:

The flowgraph optimizer folds constant expressions in most positions (binary/unary ops, tuples of constants, in against literal collections), but f-strings whose fields are all constants are left unfolded:

>>> import dis
>>> dis.dis(lambda: f'{1}{2}')
   RESUME                   0
   LOAD_SMALL_INT           1
   FORMAT_SIMPLE
   LOAD_SMALL_INT           2
   FORMAT_SIMPLE
   BUILD_STRING             2
   RETURN_VALUE

This could compile to a single LOAD_CONST '12', the same way '1' + '2' already does.

The transformation is safe under a narrow guard:

  • FORMAT_SIMPLE on an operand that is an exact str, int, float or bool constant is pure and calls no user code (subclasses can override __format__/__str__, so exact-type checks are required).
  • FORMAT_WITH_SPEC with a constant spec on those exact types is pure for the same reason, though it could be left to a follow-up.
  • BUILD_STRING over constant strings is pure.

Conversion functions (!r, !s, !a) lower to intrinsics before FORMAT_SIMPLE, so f'{1!r}' is out of scope unless the intrinsic is also handled; the initial change can simply not match those sequences.

Constant fields do appear in real code — mixed f-strings like f'{HEADER}{x}' gain partially (the constant fields fold, shrinking BUILD_STRING's operand count), and fully-constant f-strings show up in generated code and in string-building via comprehensions.

The natural place is a fold_format_simple alongside fold_tuple_of_constants in Python/flowgraph.c, using the existing get_const_loading_instrs / instr_make_load_const helpers.

gh-77273 covered the opcode-level inefficiency of f-string formatting and was resolved by the FORMAT_SIMPLE/FORMAT_WITH_SPEC redesign; this proposal is about folding the constant cases of those opcodes, which is not currently done anywhere in the compiler.

With a prototype of the fold, a fully-constant f-string costs the same as the equivalent string literal (~34 ns/call instead of ~1770 ns/call on a debug free-threaded build — I'll post release-build pyperf numbers on the PR). I have a patch ready and will follow up with it.

Has this already been discussed elsewhere?

This is a minor feature, which does not need previous discussion elsewhere

Links to previous discussion of this feature:

No response

Linked PRs
  • gh-154911

贡献指南

打开贡献指南

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

调研方向

从 Python/flowgraph.c 中 fold_tuple_of_constants 旁边开始,并检查 get_const_loading_instrs 和 instr_make_load_const。验证优化器能够处理符合条件的常量 FORMAT_SIMPLE 和 BUILD_STRING 序列,同时保持转换和非精确类型不变,然后将生成的字节码和性能与链接的 PR gh-154911 进行比较。

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

评估

技术栈
python
领域
compilers
Issue 类型
功能
难度
3/5
预计耗时
1-2 天
活跃度
停滞
描述清晰度
描述清楚
新手友好度
25/100

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。