On 24.02.2006, at 22:42, Bryce Kampjes wrote:
>
> Yes, sure at the VM level, though I believe that it's better to write
> such a compiler in Smalltalk rather than in Slang, C, or C++. I wasn't
> suggesting you do that kind of optimisation. Mearly suggesting that
> it's better done elsewhere.
>
> Such optimisations are not in the VW VM though it does optimise
> contexts by using a context cache stack. I've been planning to use
> full method inlining to allow Exupery (a native code compiler for
> Squeak) to compete with VW for send performance.

There is a nice talk by Eliot Miranda about a system (where
the dynamic optimization is done bytecode-to-bytecode in
Smalltalk, leveraging the existing JIT as the backend for code
generation):

Bytecode-to-bytecode adaptive optimization for Smalltalk
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8988857822906068209

     Marcus