[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.
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