Steve Harris wrote: >> nope, i meant dynamic updates on a realtime (lock-free) >> code path; it's an interesting problem with, afaict, no >> obviously elegant solutions. > >Argh! I was thinking of dumping the code and rebuilding (hopefully keeping >the state). Doing it that way would be interesting, but much harder. Youd >have to either use a lot of function calls or do some hard code relocation >stuff I think.
yep, i was thinking about direct code generation (relocation if you will) assuming it'd give the best execution speed. rt modification of such constructs can easily set your thoughts spinning for a few hours. >No, I imagine it will be noticably slower, however I think CPU's are >getting to the kind of power where its feasable to use it for real. i have yet to notice a power increase in the local cpu. ;) >The dynamic compiliation will win you some speed back. > >I dont think the implementation is really that hard, the UI would be the >most complex part, as always. Its kindof a pipedream anyway, as none of us >has enough free time to tackle it at the moment. sigh, yes. i've been thinking about a simplistic dsp-only scripting language for similar purposes lately, but concluded that for the time being gcc producing dynamically reloaded .so's would be the way to go (unfortunately saol produces executables, hint ;). tim
