| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please also benchmark your implementation.
Kwargs handling will affect performance even if keyword will not be actually used (e.g. calls like reduce(f, seq, init)). IIUC, PyArg_ParseTupleAndKeywords is much slower in general than PyArg_UnpackTuple.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
CC @sobolevn, as you have added AC comment. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Co-authored-by: Sergey B Kirpichev <skirpichev@gmail.com>
|
Now with AC (patch2). Patch with AC (a draft).diff --git a/Modules/_functoolsmodule.c b/Modules/_functoolsmodule.c
index 802b1cf792..8faa8ad1ac 100644
--- a/Modules/_functoolsmodule.c
+++ b/Modules/_functoolsmodule.c
@@ -932,15 +932,30 @@ _functools_cmp_to_key_impl(PyObject *module, PyObject *mycmp)
/* reduce (used to be a builtin) ********************************************/
-// Not converted to argument clinic, because of `args` in-place modification.
-// AC will affect performance.
+/*[clinic input]
+_functools.reduce
+
+ function as func: object
+ iterable as seq: object
+ /
+ initial as result: object(c_default="NULL") = None
+
+Apply a function of two arguments cumulatively.
+
+Apply it to the items of a sequence or iterable, from left to right, so as to
+reduce the iterable to a single value. For example, reduce(lambda x, y: x+y,
+[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]) calculates ((((1+2)+3)+4)+5). If initial is present, it is
+placed before the items of the iterable in the calculation, and serves as a
+default when the iterable is empty.
+[clinic start generated code]*/
+
static PyObject *
-functools_reduce(PyObject *self, PyObject *args)
+_functools_reduce_impl(PyObject *module, PyObject *func, PyObject *seq,
+ PyObject *result)
+/*[clinic end generated code: output=30d898fe1267c79d input=b7082b8b1473fdc2]*/
{
- PyObject *seq, *func, *result = NULL, *it;
+ PyObject *args, *it;
- if (!PyArg_UnpackTuple(args, "reduce", 2, 3, &func, &seq, &result))
- return NULL;
if (result != NULL)
Py_INCREF(result);
@@ -1006,16 +1021,6 @@ functools_reduce(PyObject *self, PyObject *args)
return NULL;
}
-PyDoc_STRVAR(functools_reduce_doc,
-"reduce(function, iterable[, initial], /) -> value\n\
-\n\
-Apply a function of two arguments cumulatively to the items of a sequence\n\
-or iterable, from left to right, so as to reduce the iterable to a single\n\
-value. For example, reduce(lambda x, y: x+y, [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]) calculates\n\
-((((1+2)+3)+4)+5). If initial is present, it is placed before the items\n\
-of the iterable in the calculation, and serves as a default when the\n\
-iterable is empty.");
-
/* lru_cache object **********************************************************/
/* There are four principal algorithmic differences from the pure python version:
@@ -1720,7 +1725,7 @@ PyDoc_STRVAR(_functools_doc,
"Tools that operate on functions.");
static PyMethodDef _functools_methods[] = {
- {"reduce", functools_reduce, METH_VARARGS, functools_reduce_doc},
+ _FUNCTOOLS_REDUCE_METHODDEF
_FUNCTOOLS_CMP_TO_KEY_METHODDEF
{NULL, NULL} /* sentinel */
};You should run ./python Tools/clinic/clinic.py Modules/_functoolsmodule.c to update autogenerated code. I did some benchmarks. Details# a.py
import pyperf
from functools import reduce
f = lambda x, y: x + y
lst = list(range(10))
init = 123
runner = pyperf.Runner()
runner.bench_func('reduce(f, lst)', reduce, f, lst)
runner.bench_func('reduce(f, lst, init)', reduce, f, lst, init)Run e.g. with: python a.py -q -o ref.json. with results:
Looks the patch with AC even slightly faster than in the main. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@skirpichev Is initial=None safe for backward compatibility? Does this mean reduce(Callable[[None, T], None], Iterable[T], None) will behave differently in 3.13 and 3.14? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the PR! I think that if we want to add keyword support for functools.reduce, it should be done for all parameters, not just the initial. If so, this would match the behavior of the pure Python version of functools.
Sorry, something went wrong.
No, it doesn't. Someone can use None as initial value. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Taken from patch by Sergey B Kirpichev <skirpichev@gmail.com>
That might slowdown the patch v2.
That was a draft;) I think we could use same trick as for the Python version. BTW, it seems the PEP 661 doesn't cover this at all. Edit: Updated AC patch with a sentinel value.diff --git a/Modules/_functoolsmodule.c b/Modules/_functoolsmodule.c
index 802b1cf792..00b4a5e6cc 100644
--- a/Modules/_functoolsmodule.c
+++ b/Modules/_functoolsmodule.c
@@ -932,15 +932,31 @@ _functools_cmp_to_key_impl(PyObject *module, PyObject *mycmp)
/* reduce (used to be a builtin) ********************************************/
-// Not converted to argument clinic, because of `args` in-place modification.
-// AC will affect performance.
+/*[clinic input]
+_functools.reduce
+
+ function as func: object
+ iterable as seq: object
+ /
+ initial as result: object(c_default="NULL") = _functools._initial_missing
+
+Apply a function of two arguments cumulatively to an iterable, from left to right.
+
+This efficiently reduce the iterable to a single value. If initial is present,
+it is placed before the items of the iterable in the calculation, and serves as
+a default when the iterable is empty.
+
+For example, reduce(lambda x, y: x+y, [1, 2, 3, 4, 5])
+calculates ((((1+2)+3)+4)+5).
+[clinic start generated code]*/
+
static PyObject *
-functools_reduce(PyObject *self, PyObject *args)
+_functools_reduce_impl(PyObject *module, PyObject *func, PyObject *seq,
+ PyObject *result)
+/*[clinic end generated code: output=30d898fe1267c79d input=40be8069bcbc1a75]*/
{
- PyObject *seq, *func, *result = NULL, *it;
+ PyObject *args, *it;
- if (!PyArg_UnpackTuple(args, "reduce", 2, 3, &func, &seq, &result))
- return NULL;
if (result != NULL)
Py_INCREF(result);
@@ -1006,16 +1022,6 @@ functools_reduce(PyObject *self, PyObject *args)
return NULL;
}
-PyDoc_STRVAR(functools_reduce_doc,
-"reduce(function, iterable[, initial], /) -> value\n\
-\n\
-Apply a function of two arguments cumulatively to the items of a sequence\n\
-or iterable, from left to right, so as to reduce the iterable to a single\n\
-value. For example, reduce(lambda x, y: x+y, [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]) calculates\n\
-((((1+2)+3)+4)+5). If initial is present, it is placed before the items\n\
-of the iterable in the calculation, and serves as a default when the\n\
-iterable is empty.");
-
/* lru_cache object **********************************************************/
/* There are four principal algorithmic differences from the pure python version:
@@ -1720,7 +1726,7 @@ PyDoc_STRVAR(_functools_doc,
"Tools that operate on functions.");
static PyMethodDef _functools_methods[] = {
- {"reduce", functools_reduce, METH_VARARGS, functools_reduce_doc},
+ _FUNCTOOLS_REDUCE_METHODDEF
_FUNCTOOLS_CMP_TO_KEY_METHODDEF
{NULL, NULL} /* sentinel */
};
@@ -1789,6 +1795,10 @@ _functools_exec(PyObject *module)
// lru_list_elem is used only in _lru_cache_wrapper.
// So we don't expose it in module namespace.
+ if (PyModule_Add(module, "_initial_missing", _PyObject_New(&PyBaseObject_Type)) < 0) {
+ return -1;
+ }
+
return 0;
}
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@skirpichev should the default be specified at all? I think reduce(function, iterable, /, initial) is closer representation of internal working than reduce(function, iterable, /, initial=None). Or is there some sort of a convention? EDIT: Ah scratch that. That makes initial required. I meant reduce(function, iterable, /[, initial]) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
No. Current code in the main more accurately can be described as function with multiple signatures. Funny notation reduce(function, iterable[, initial], /) means it's possible to have two signature: reduce(function, iterable, /) reduce(function, iterable, initial, /) The AC can't represent multiple signatures yet. The only way - using the sentinel value _initial_missing, like pure-Python version does. See updated patch above. You shouldn't use None as default value. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| def reduce(function, sequence, initial=_initial_missing): | ||
| """ | ||
| reduce(function, iterable[, initial], /) -> value | ||
| reduce(function, iterable, /, initial=None) -> value |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe use ellipsis:
| reduce(function, iterable, /, initial=None) -> value | |
| reduce(function, iterable, /, initial=...) -> value |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
See PEP 661:)
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But the sentinel is private and doesn't even exist in the C implementation. Ellipsis is frequently used for unspecified default values in typeshed. We could use multiple signatures though.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But the sentinel is private and doesn't even exist in the C implementation.
It's easy to add, see #125917 (comment)
Ellipsis is frequently used for unspecified default values in typeshed.
We could use multiple signatures though.
Yes, I think it's fine for the sphinx docs. But help will looks like this (as for pure-Python version):
>>> help(functools.reduce)
Help on built-in function reduce in module _functools:
reduce(function, iterable, /,
initial=_functools._initial_missing)
Apply a function of two arguments cumulatively to an iterable, from left to right.
[...]
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think I've ever seen =... in the docs. Do we have precedent for that?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems like the signature is giving inspect a hard time. But it is autogenerated by AC. Did I do something wrong?
reduce(function, iterable, /,
initial=_functools._initial_missing)
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But the sentinel is private and doesn't even exist in the C implementation. Ellipsis is frequently used for unspecified default values in typeshed. We could use multiple signatures though.
Multiple signatures for a docs sounds like a good solution.
Using ... for default values is essentially the same as using None, and it's just wrong since users can pass ... as the initial value.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think I've ever seen =... in the docs. Do we have precedent for that?
Yeah, e.g. for the int.from_bytes, for example.
it seems like the signature is giving inspect a hard time. But it is autogenerated by AC. Did I do something wrong?
First, note that reduce() has no correct signature in the current main.
Now AC adds one, but it can't be parsed by inspect._signature_fromstr(): this helper has own opinion on what can be specified as a default value (e.g. it can't be a complex number).
Sorry, something went wrong.
* Apply patch by Sergey B Kirpichev <skirpichev@gmail.com> - fix typo * Update docs
Co-authored-by: Peter Bierma <zintensitydev@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Sergey B Kirpichev <skirpichev@gmail.com>
|
Do you update this test? cpython/Lib/test/test_inspect/test_inspect.py Lines 5699 to 5701 in ad6110a |
Sorry, something went wrong.
…Agz6D.rst Co-authored-by: Erlend E. Aasland <erlend.aasland@protonmail.com>
|
Checked against debug build. Followed script from #125917 (comment)
EDIT: On release:
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks!
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
BTW, you need a What's New entry for this. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@sayandipdutta, this now has merge conflicts. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I think that most people are ok with adding only one positional-or-keyword parameter (not 3). Is there something to do, besides simple conflict resolution? @Eclips4, are you ok with this (as your pr depends on the current one)? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM! Thank you!
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Congrats with landing your PR, @sayandipdutta; good job, and thanks for your contribution! Thanks for reviewing, y'all! |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
It looks like bedevere is stuck. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Thanks a lot everyone, for your help! Hope to be a regular contributor 🤞🏾 |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Before:
After:
Issue: gh-125916
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--125917.org.readthedocs.build/