This mail is an automated notification from the bugs tracker
of the project: GNUstep.
/**************************************************************************/
[bugs #9595] Latest Modifications:
Changes by:
Stefan Urbanek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
'Date:
Fri 07/09/04 at 14:11 (Europe/Bratislava)
What | Removed | Added
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assigned to | None | stefanu
Status | Open | Analyzed
------------------ Additional Follow-up Comments ----------------------------
Patch looks good. I'll apply it when I get home.
Concerning the STCompiler change: what do you mean? Recycling of a literal? If yes,
then it is not possible, because arrays and strings are mutable. However, it can be
done for numbers as a special case. Has anyone else elaborated more deeply the issue?
/**************************************************************************/
[bugs #9595] Full Item Snapshot:
URL: <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitem&item_id=9595>
Project: GNUstep
Submitted by: Alexander V. Diemand
On: Thu 07/08/04 at 14:52
Category: Libraries
Severity: 5 - Average
Item Group: Bug
Resolution: None
Assigned to: stefanu
Status: Analyzed
Summary: StepTalk was not able to handle more than 256(128) literals in scripts.
Original Submission: Scripts written in Smalltalk and interpreted by StepTalk where
limited to max. 256 literals (1 byte index) such as strings and numbers per block.
This is way below what is normally needed.
A simple update of the compiler which computes the literal's index and stores it in
the bytecode, plus the interpreter was necessary to allow for 16 bit indexes. This
should allow for 64k literals.
The attached diff is made from the following files:
StepTalk/Languages/Smalltalk/STBytecodes.m
StepTalk/Languages/Smalltalk/STCompiler.m
against the current CVS version.
BTW: the patch uploaded by Mateu has not been fully applied to the CVS version of
StepTalk. The needed change to STCompiler.m has been included again.
Thanks for including this in CVS.
Alex.
Follow-up Comments
------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 07/09/04 at 14:11 By: stefanu
Patch looks good. I'll apply it when I get home.
Concerning the STCompiler change: what do you mean? Recycling of a literal? If yes,
then it is not possible, because arrays and strings are mutable. However, it can be
done for numbers as a special case. Has anyone else elaborated more deeply the issue?
CC List
-------
CC Address | Comment
------------------------------------+-----------------------------
stefanu |
File Attachments
-------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu 07/08/04 at 14:52 Name: bugfix_size_of_literal_index.diff Size: 3.01KB
By: axeld
Diff against STCompiler.m and STBytecodes.m
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/download.php?item_id=9595&item_file_id=1469
For detailed info, follow this link:
<http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitem&item_id=9595>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via/by Savannah
http://savannah.gnu.org/
_______________________________________________
Bug-gnustep mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnustep
