I like your suggestions, brings us more in sync withPYLONG_FROM_UINT.
Just wanted to keep the diff small.

BTW, next time you can apply several suggestions in one shot (subscribers will get less notifications): it's possible add them in one batch (on tab "files changed").

BTW, next time you can apply several suggestions in one shot (subscribers will get less notifications): it's possible add them in one batch (on tab "files changed").

Great, will do!

I've done some more syncs with PYLONG_FROM_UINT, if we want to keep the diff small, we can remove (all of) them.

@chris-eibl, please don't sync with the main branch, unless you want to fix file conflict or trigger a CI build.

Just to reassure: this needs no further action from me atm - correct?

Most probably, another core reviewer is needed since it is still labeled as "awaiting core review"?

Do I have to request this? If yes, whom should I ask for a review?

CC@picnixz

Out of curiosity, can we have some benchmarks?

pyperformance was neutral on it. I did think of some micro benchmarks, but I've found no good candidate without writing an external c application to directly benchmark thePyAPI_FUNCPyLong_AsSsize_t, yet.

Maybe something with ctypes would work out, too?

The bots are failing. Seems not related to the PR.

Maybe updating with the main branch can fix it - shall I give it a try?

yes, the CI config changed

Yeah - that fixed it :)

🤖 New build scheduled with the buildbot fleet by@picnixz for commitfda2844 🤖

Results will be shown at:

https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/grid?branch=refs%2Fpull%2F129301%2Fmerge

If you want to schedule another build, you need to add the🔨 test-with-buildbots label again.

So the 2 build bots currently failing are know to fail so I think we can safely merge this one. Just asking Victor if he wants to add something else here.

Here are some benchmarks:

• on my Windows 10 PC (i5-4570 CPU)
• Microsoft Visual Studio 2022 17.13.0 Preview 5.0
• release build (non-PGO)
• about 25% faster

before:

some small ints          -5:    21.26 ms           0:    20.83 ms         256:    20.90 mssome medium ints -1073741823:   123.28 ms        1000:   124.79 ms  1073741822:   122.32 mssome bigger ints -1073741824:   196.28 ms  1073741824:   195.87 ms

after:

some small ints          -5:    20.90 ms           0:    20.45 ms         256:    20.50 mssome medium ints -1073741823:   100.39 ms        1000:    98.54 ms  1073741822:    98.61 mssome bigger ints -1073741824:   198.79 ms  1073741824:   198.45 ms

#include<chrono>#include<iomanip>#include<iostream>#include"Python.h"#define_PY_NSMALLPOSINTS257#define_PY_NSMALLNEGINTS5const Py_ssize_t PyLong_MASK_ssize_t =static_cast<Py_ssize_t>(PyLong_MASK);voidbench(Py_ssize_t val){constauto start{std::chrono::steady_clock::now() };for (size_t i =0; i <10000000; ++i)    {        PyObject* obj =PyLong_FromSsize_t(val);Py_DECREF(obj);    }constauto finish{std::chrono::steady_clock::now() };const std::chrono::duration<double> elapsed_seconds{ finish - start };    std::cout <<std::setw(12) << val <<":" <<std::setw(8) << elapsed_seconds.count() *1000 <<" ms\n";}intmain(){Py_Initialize();    std::cout <<"some small ints\n";    std::cout <<std::setprecision(2) << std::fixed;bench(-_PY_NSMALLNEGINTS);bench(0);bench(_PY_NSMALLPOSINTS -1);    std::cout <<"some medium ints\n";bench(0 - PyLong_MASK_ssize_t);bench(1000);bench(PyLong_MASK_ssize_t -1);    std::cout <<"some bigger ints\n";bench(0 - PyLong_MASK_ssize_t -1);bench(PyLong_MASK_ssize_t +1);Py_Finalize();}

The benchmarks are promising. We are gaining like 10-20% so it's non-negligible.

@vstinner: shallPyLong_FromInt32(),PyLong_FromUInt32() andPyLong_FromUInt64() use these macros in a follow up PR, too? AFAIR you've introduced those methods.

@vstinner: shall PyLong_FromInt32(), PyLong_FromUInt32() and PyLong_FromUInt64() use these macros in a follow up PR, too? AFAIR you've introduced those methods.

Let's wait until this change PR is merged.

I'll merge this by the end of the week (hence my assignment).@chris-eibl can you update the branch just to run the latest CI? TiA (I'll do it tomorrow otherwise)

Thank you!

shall PyLong_FromInt32(), PyLong_FromUInt32() and PyLong_FromUInt64() use these macros in a follow up PR, too? AFAIR you've introduced those methods.

You can reuse the same issue for this follow-up PR btw.