Problems fixed - sorry for the confusion. I will send a new patch to guile-sources which corrects all of these issues.
Noah On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Noah Lavine <noah.b.lav...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I just sent two patches which start to implement this to > guile-sour...@gnu.org. (The first patch is actually a small > documentation change, which I made only so I could rewrite it with > updated documentation in the second patch.) > > The patch works as you described - SCM objcodes become five-word > objects, and all of the references get updated. I also had to change > all of the files that include static objcodes, which is why there are > changes to continuations.c, control.c, foreign.c, gsubr.c, and smob.c. > > Unfortunately, I've hit a snag that I don't understand - if you try to > build it, you will see that control.c encounters an error in a > function that isn't changed by the patch. I am hoping that someone who > understands Guile's build system more than I do could look at that, > because I don't know what's happening. > > There is one other issue with the patch that needs discussion, which > is what to initialize the extra cells to. Currently they're > initialized to NULL, and a comment describes a possible convention for > storing JIT code with them, but I'm not convinced it's the best way. > In particular, using an SCM symbol like 'no-jitcode for empty pointers > would be more self-documenting, but I wasn't sure if it would work in > statically-generated objcodes. > > Thanks > Noah > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> wrote: >> On Tue 22 Jun 2010 00:23, Noah Lavine <noah.b.lav...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> If I may ask, do you already have patches or a git branch that adds [a >>> native code slot to objcode]? If so, what are you doing about the >>> embedded objcode issue? (Changing the bytecode to leave room for it, >>> or hiding the slot in the C code?) >> >> I do not have a patch, no. Feel free to implement :) Having not >> implemented it, I do not know exactly what's needed, but I would not put >> it in what is the struct scm_objcode, rather in the SCM value that >> includes the objcode. >> >> I don't know if we can somehow fit this in a "double cell" or if we need >> to have a five-word object (see scm_words ()). >> >> Andy >> -- >> http://wingolog.org/ >> >
