chromatic wrote: > On Monday 19 January 2009 14:13:22 Bob Rogers wrote: > >> Do you think that would be fast enough? The usual way for dynamic >> languages to get fast compiled numeric code is to bind variables to >> hardware types at compile time, and then inline numeric operations in >> order to use that information. That seems to require op_i_i_i and >> op_n_n_n versions of these ops, which are not language-dependent. >> > > I don't see how Parrot can be fast enough in general without JIT. With JIT, > if these ops are implemented in terms of other ops, there's no speed penalty. > > I think one criteria to consider is, are their architectures out there (that we're targeting now or likely to) that have the equivalent op implemented at a CPU instruction level, such that we could JIT it in the future? If so, there's probably benefit in it staying a Parrot op.
Jonathan _______________________________________________ http://lists.parrot.org/mailman/listinfo/parrot-dev
