Exupery March 2007

exupery@lists.squeakfoundation.org

4 participants
4 discussions

Any volunteers to mentor a Crypto/Exupery Soc project?
by bryce＠kampjes.demon.co.uk 06 Mar '07

06 Mar '07

I've proposed a project to use Exupery to provide either fast ByteArray or fast 32 bit arithmetic aiming to be useful for cryptology. Is there any crypto people interested in co-mentoring? Most of the mentoring will be on the Exupery side but some help selecting benchmarks and evaluating the results could be very useful. The idea for 32 bit integers is to provide a proper boxed object that contains a 32 bit integer then write primitives for the required arithmetic. With some work (the project) Exupery should be able to remove the unnecessary boxing between expressions. If the objects were "register" objects that could be assigned to then there is a chance that we could remove all Smalltalk's overhead although a safe guess is would be we'd achieve about 1/2 C's speed. 32 bit integers are a great project because the code delivered could be very simply extended to also work with floating point numbers providing the same level of efficiency. Working with 32 bit integers allows the approach to be proven in a practical setting without also needing to add support for floating point instructions. Less work, but proves the same point and will be easily adaptable to do both. Bryce P.S. I messed up the exupery address in my first post thus I'm resending to the exupery list.

1 0

New implementation of squeak
by Guillermo Adrián Molina 04 Mar '07

04 Mar '07

Hi to all, I am a Smalltak VM enthusiast. I found this list an interesting reading. But I was wandering a few things. If you could rewrite the Squeak's object memory from scratch, in order to simplify and accelerate exupery, what would you do? -The first thing that come to my mind is SmallInts, Squeaks uses 1 tagged integers, but what would make your life easier? -What about floats?, would you tag them instead of boxing them? -Arrays,#at: and #at:put:, How would you implement arrays, in order to speed up #at: and #at:put: -bools? -The garbage collector, what solution is best suited for exupery? -sends and blocks?, what about them? Anything else? Thank you very much for your efforts of making exupery.

2 3

[ANN] Exupery 0.11 released
by bryce＠kampjes.demon.co.uk 02 Mar '07

02 Mar '07

This release contains: * primitives for #new and #@ * ExuperyMethodContext (allows full debugger support for compiled code) * interrupt checking (allows Alt-. and profiling to work inside compiled code) Installation instructions are here: http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3945 The new primitive only works for pointer objects with less than 64 instance variables and are a fixed size (not Arrays). This covers most uses inside Smalltalk, and the new primitive can be easily generalised when there's a benchmark that requires it. Here's the benchmarks: arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1387 compiled 127 ratio: 10.920 bytecodeBenchmark 2139 compiled 484 ratio: 4.419 sendBenchmark 1582 compiled 728 ratio: 2.173 doLoopsBenchmark 1063 compiled 843 ratio: 1.261 pointCreation 1075 compiled 1030 ratio: 1.044 largeExplorers 585 compiled 595 ratio: 0.983 compilerBenchmark 474 compiled 454 ratio: 1.044 Cumulative Time 1058.337 com We delayed this release to fix a bug found by Andy Tween that seems to occur frequently on Windows but is cross platform. Thank's to Andy's help the bug is now fixed. And thanks for building the Windows VMs. The next release will compile in the background. Bryce

3 2

Exupery 0.11rc1 is out
by bryce＠kampjes.demon.co.uk 02 Mar '07

02 Mar '07

I'm finishing up the 0.11 release. It should be both more reliable and more functional than 0.10. There are known bugs but they only stop methods from being compiled. They don't cause crashes or incorrect code. This release includes: * A #new and #@ primitive for fixed size pointer objects. * A class for compiled methods that provides better debugger support. * Interrupt checking from compiled code so Alt-. will work. This should include all the VM and compiler work required to allow methods to be compiled in the background safely. That's the goal for 0.12. I'm thinking about scripting building an Exupery development image. The development tools use GraphViz to layout the method's control flow graphs in inspectors. Also the tests can rely on external packages, this is normally when the test was created to capture a bug. I've had a look at Andrew's VM building script. It would be nice to automate the set-up of a VM building environment. Though, I'd rather have it scripted from Smalltalk than from shell. Would it be worthwhile adding the shell script to a class side method as executable documentation? It would be nice to have a Windows VM for this release. Bryce

3 4

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

Exupery March 2007