[ANN] Chuck type inferencer
denker at iam.unibe.ch
Sat Jun 5 16:45:33 UTC 2004
Am 01.06.2004 um 16:07 schrieb Colin Putney:
> On May 28, 2004, at 4:46 PM, Lex Spoon wrote:
>> Tim Rowledge <tim at sumeru.stanford.edu> wrote:
>>> "Lex Spoon" <lex at cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
>>>> The major memory requirement, it turns out, is that AutoChuck is
>>>> around parse trees for every method. So I'm trying to eithre get
>>>> rid of
>>>> that requirement or make the parse trees take less memory.
>>> It might be useful to recall one of Eliot's battle cries -
>>> "CompiledMethods are flattened parsetrees"
> That's an interesting position given his work on the AOStA bytecode
> optimizer. My guess would be that the more you optimize the bytecodes,
> the less they look like the parse tree that created them.
Yes, but that would be totaly transparent for the user (e.g. the
developer). A dynamic optimizing system always de-optimizes as soon
as you try to look harder (e.g with the debugger).
So all the magic of AOStA is pretty much invisible. On the other hand:
Having a Jitter around by default means that we don't care
about how bad the non-optimized code is wrt. to execution. We could use
the AST directly. (Or better, a compressed version like
franz' Slim Binaries...).
So "CompiledMethods are flattened parsetrees" does not mean that you
would use the cm we have now as the AST, but use the
AST as the compiled methods...
More information about the Squeak-dev