On 5 November 2010 11:19, Ben Kloosterman <[email protected]> wrote: > Aren’t regions good for heap but problematic for static data ( and maybe > stack) ? tagging all static data would be expensive ( though static > immutable data is often const or readonly so maybe there is some way)
Your region system can capture as much or as little information as you want it to. The region system for the compiler I'm working on at the moment has little interest in distinguishing different indexes of the same region with array type, for example. When it does, you can annotate the region of interest as needed, I use this for global, static lists of functions, for example. As far as dependent types go, it would be nice to specify *which* dependent types imply region types. -- William Leslie _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
