Hi,

Thanks for all your replies, I think I'll end up getting my ideas straight ;-).

> Note however that ECL does not do native compilation on demand.
> It does not have a JIT compiler to machine code if that is what you are 
> looking for. 
>
@Juan : Well now that is an interesting remark, as what I read (unless I'm 
mixing something up) I thought that ECL uses several steps to produce 
executable code (see http://ecls.sourceforge.net/ecldev/devel_5.html) and 
naively I figured that the compile function would trigger that process and 
somehow insert the machine-code compiled from generated c-code to the 
lisp-interpreter in order to replace the bytecode in order to speed up.

Up to now I thought it was possible with LISP to have a program construct some 
arbitrary list and then just call EVAL on it in order to try to run that 
'program' (should probably call it function to be exact) ... as for example 
(eval (append '(* 2) '(3 4))) actually does.

What I plan to do is actually to construct a list like that : (defun f (...) 
...) and call eval on that list ... this will certainly generate some function 
that may be used later on. Some of the functions generated that way will be 
fast enough for some general purpose. However I imagined that it was possible 
to use the compile command on some of these generated functions in order to 
transform that bit into machine code ... and have the byte-code replaced by it. 
I feel that this must be possible somehow with ECL perhaps I'm just trying to 
do it the wrong way ...

Thanks for any comments
ecky


----- Mail original -----
De: "Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll" <juanjose.garciarip...@gmail.com>
À: e...@ecky.fr
Cc: ecls-list@lists.sourceforge.net
Envoyé: Lundi 16 Juillet 2012 09:15:22
Objet: Re: [Ecls-list] Is ECL really interpreted ?


On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 10:41 PM, < e...@ecky.fr > wrote: 


I'm currently evaluating the possibility to use ECL for my software-project and 
it is important for me that the language I use is interpreted with optional 
partial compilation on demande (for optimisation reasons) 
In ECL the cost of bytecodes compilation is so small that it is done all the 
time. It also avoids certain problems and inefficiencies with certain paradigms 
of lisp interpreters, such as those that do list traversals and have to expand 
macros every time they find them. 


Note however that ECL does not do native compilation on demand. It does not 
have a JIT compiler to machine code if that is what you are looking for. 


Juanjo 


-- 
Instituto de Física Fundamental, CSIC 
c/ Serrano, 113b, Madrid 28006 (Spain) 
http://juanjose.garciaripoll.googlepages.com 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Ecls-list mailing list
Ecls-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ecls-list

Reply via email to