[ANN] Chuck type inferencer

Marcel Weiher marcel at metaobject.com
Mon Jun 7 21:35:03 UTC 2004

On 5 Jun 2004, at 19:22, Colin Putney wrote:
> On Jun 5, 2004, at 11:45 AM, Marcus Denker wrote:
>> 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...).
> Yes, I've been thinking about this as well.

Me 2. ;-)

However, I think it would be even better if we decoupled the 
execution-object-tree (whatever you want to call it) from the syntax 
tree generated by the compiler.   After all, one particular syntax is 
just another view onto the code (MVC), right? ;-)

> Yes, "Parse trees are structured CompiledMethods".

"ExpressionObjects" can be structured CompiledMethods and much, much 

>  I'd love to see Squeak executing ASTs with the hotspots optimized by 
> Exupery.



Marcel Weiher				Metaobject Software Technologies
marcel at metaobject.com		www.metaobject.com
Metaprogramming for the Graphic Arts.   HOM, IDEAs, MetaAd etc.

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list