Interesting idea...

"Andreas Raab" <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:

>  The test itself takes advantage of
> CompiledMethod's special object format so the cost is very close to zero
> here - if you take the mcache hit rate into account it's exactly zero (as
> in: not measurable).
I hope this stays true if the clean CompiledMethod stuff is used;
'twould be a pity otherwise.

> [*] One might even argue that the test should be there to begin with since
> without it the VM will crash if you ever store anything but CMs in the
> method dictionaries.
I'm reasonably sure I agree with that.

> PS. It just so occured to me that going this way one might have a completely
> different interpreter/bytecode set running next to the current one. Even
> methods compiled completely to native code. Sort of like a trap. Hm...
I haven't had time to look at your code and won't have time today as I
have to run off to a party RealSoonNow but it sounds from your
description that this is not quite what one might want for supporting a
native code method facility. Sure, one could compile bytecodes to native
and _replace_ the original method this way but you'd have to do some
extra stuff to keep the original around (assuming you have any need for
it in the future - depends on caching etc). Then again I suspect that
wasn't quite what you were thinking of at the time anyway.

tim
-- 
Tim Rowledge, tim at sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
Don't diddle code to make it faster; find a better algorithm.