More load ordering for MC?

[Avi Bryant]

On Sep 28, 2005, at 4:50 PM, Daniel Vainsencher wrote:

> So - how do people here feel about MC ordering method additions  
> topologically, so that A>>sel1 comes no sooner than B>>sel2 if  
> A>>sel1 sends the selector sel2, at least when such an order exists?

Certainly doesn't bother me; it can't be any worse than the current  
approach, and in the rare case it might even be better :)  However, I  
wonder about the implementation: presumably you have to compile all  
the methods (without loading them) before you can do the analysis  
required for that.  Once you're splitting up compiling and loading,  
how hard would it be to do something closer to an atomic load, where  
you swap in entire method dictionaries in a single message send... ?

Avi