Hi Joel- My question is related to developing a new JIT capability for PDL3.
Since one could use libtcc itself to build some XS code at runtime to load to load and run from perl, it is clear that JIT compiling does not have any specific dependency on the perl keywords API itself. I'm not trying to change C::Blocks, just want to determine how much I'll be able to leverage from David's efforts. One model for JIT support for PDL3 could be to use roles which could allow for pluggable JIT support. The older perls could use a "clunky JIT" using libtcc or tcc as above. Newer perls would support the improved performance and *much* lower latency possible with C::Blocks. --Chris On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 9:29 PM, Joel Berger <[email protected]> wrote: > Chris I disagree. For new code I see little reason to limit the api to > functionality available that far back. The keyword API is a great new > feature to show off, why limit things? > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 7:40 PM Chris Marshall <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Does C::Blocks really require the perl keyword API to work? >> It would be nice if there was a version that could work with >> perl 5.10.x. >> >> >> --Chris >> >> >> On 8/4/2015 17:33, David Mertens wrote: >> >> Hey Chris, >> >> I wish I could say something more precise and causal about why PDL is >> slowing down, but it's hard without measurements. I think the JIT has some >> promise both in producing context-optimized code, but more importantly for >> playing around with the internals. >> >> The keyword API was introduced in v5.12. Also, I just found a way to get >> lexical variable insertion working for Perls earlier than 5.18, although I >> have not yet pushed it to CPAN. >> >> David >> >>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ pdl-general mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pdl-general
