[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
more...
> I'd love to see Squeak executing ASTs with the hotspots optimized by
> Exupery.
:-)
Marcel
--
Marcel Weiher Metaobject Software Technologies
marcel at metaobject.com www.metaobject.com
Metaprogramming for the Graphic Arts. HOM, IDEAs, MetaAd etc.
1d480c25f397c4786386135f8e8938e4
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|