Maybe there is no need to have a special handle for loops if there is an (hidden?) support for tail call in method handles ;-) I remind me a blog page from John Rose: http://blogs.sun.com/jrose/entry/tailcalls_meet_invokedynamic
There is questioning about putting coroutine in Java7. Will Java7 include the tail-call patch? I am not sure that it is compatible with the indy patch. Is there a plan to make it compatible? - Emmanuel 2010/4/9 Charles Oliver Nutter <[email protected]> > > > It occurred to me today I may have never asked about this, but why is > there no looping handle? (or have I missed something?) > > loopHandle(MethodHandle condition, MethodHandle body) > > In the current set of handles, I don't believe there's a way to > construct a loop, since you can only link handles upwards from a > target (i.e. there's no way to construct a handle to jump back to the > condition again). > > Have I missed an obvious detail, or is this a gap in the set of handles? > > I ask because I still have a perverse desire to follow up on an idea > John Rose gave me to implement JRuby's interpreter entirely with > MethodHandles...with the obvious result being that by simply composing > a set of handles they'll already be compiled to native code for me :) > > - Charlie > _______________________________________________ > mlvm-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev > > >
_______________________________________________ mlvm-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
