On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Marvin Humphrey <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Nick Wellnhofer <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Yes, the possibility that the first definition of a method could be moved to
>> a parent class is the main reason why we need all those offset variables.
>> But it's just an implementation detail. It would be nice to find a better
>> solution, but the current approach doesn't pose any serious problems.
>
> Part of what's driving this line of development is that I've personally spent
> a good part of the last year studying language implementation and other
> low-level computer science topics and I'm circling back to see if any
> of the new techniques I've learned suggest any improvements.

It sounds like you two are much better informed in this area than I
am.  I tried to do some research to catch up.

As/if Clownfish moves to having more of a runtime role (which I think
it has to if truly non-fragile ABI is desired) it seems like it would
have a lot in common with the Objective C runtimes.  In particular,
the Étoilé runtime seems to have a lot of the same features you are
looking for.   You're probably familiar, but I hadn't heard of it .
It's mostly dead code at this point (with it's ideas incorporated into
GNUstep), but short, well-described, and seemingly well-researched.

http://www.jot.fm/issues/issue_2009_01/article4.pdf
http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/etoile/branches/libobjc_tr/code/

It also sounds like it mostly worked, and that the reason for its lack
of adoption was mostly compatibility with legacy code:

http://etoileos.com/news/archive/2009/09/10/1744/
http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2331170

Have either of you looked at it?  Are there things you want to support
that it does not?

--nate
--nate

Reply via email to