[Vm-dev] Re: [squeak-dev] The Inbox: System-mt.697.mcz

David T. Lewis lewis at mail.msen.com
Wed Jan 28 03:15:28 UTC 2015

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 04:14:24PM -0800, Eliot Miranda wrote:
> On Jan 27, 2015, at 4:00 PM, "David T. Lewis" <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 01:51:52PM -0800, Eliot Miranda wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
> >>> On 27.01.2015, at 22:21, Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> AndreasSystemProfiler
> >>> 
> >>> This is not in trunk, right?
> >>> If so, why?
> >> 
> >> It came from Qwaq/Terf so it ended up in
> >> http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/AndreasSystemProfiler.  Further, as Levente says
> >> it depends on support that is in Cog VMs (JIT, Stack & Interpreter) but not
> >> (yet) in the trunk Interpreter.  So I guess it doesn't belong in trunk
> >> until the Cog Interpreter has been merged with the trunk Interpreter.
> >> That's a fair amount of work, and neither David nor I have the time for it
> >> right now.
> > 
> > I did spend some time last year trying to get the primitives working in
> > trunk Interpreter, but I was a bit out of my depth and did not get it right.
> Since the code is in the Cog Interpreter the right way to do this IMO us
> to port bug fixes to primitives etc into the Cog Interpreter and call the
> Cog VMMaker trunk.  Going the other way takes longer to get to the same place.

Hi Eliot,

Was Andreas' profiler fully functional on an Interpreter generated from oscog
at one point? I know that Andreas had done at least an initial implementation
in that part of the code. I had assumed that his main focus in that time frame
would have been on Cog, so I was not entirely sure if the Interpreter
implementation was complete.

Of course I was trying to adopt the implementation from the oscog branch
when I looked at this last year. But given that I was not successful, I
won't attempt to argue that this was the best possible approach.


More information about the Vm-dev mailing list