Am 09.11.2005 um 11:50 schrieb Tony Garnock-Jones:
Bryce Kampjes wrote:
The big question is whether to work on blocks next.
Yes please! I'm looking forward to throwing away the compiler hacks
that
inline ifTrue:ifFalse: and friends.
Eeek! Why on earth would you want to do that? I'm sure this was not
what Bryce meant with "working on blocks".
If you have a simple ifTrue: in your code, what else should Exupery
compile this to than a simple conditional jump? Why replace this with
a full message send, block activation etc.? And loops would require
recursion then, which also is a full message send. To be anywhere
near useful you would at least have to do tail recursion elimination.
Or are you proposing to have Exupery inline blocks? This would
certainly be possible in precisely the cases where the current
compiler issues a jump byte code instead of full block, except you do
it in a much more complicated way without any gain in speed or
flexibility.
- Bert -
_______________________________________________
Exupery mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery
