On Tue, 8 Aug 2000 20:58:46 -0400 (EDT), Dan Sugalski wrote:
>On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, Bart Lateur wrote:
>
>> Time for subroutine threading, isntead of op threading?
>
>Probably, depending on your definition of subroutine threading.
>
>> That would definitely make the "compiled" code at least twice as big.
>
>Could, yep. (Depending, of course, on what you're talking about... :)
FORTH lingo again. "Threading" is the common name there for any kind of
P-code interpretation.
"Subroutine threading" is simply a very primitive form of native code
generation, where every op (aka "token") is simply a call instruction,
and inlined branches for if/else processing. You may optimize a little
by inlining some very often used instructions.
Because you need to compile in a complete (relative?) address for the
call, it's a bit of a wasteful way of storing P-code. But, at least, it
really is native code and thus it will reside in the code cache.
p.s. I wonder why nobody said anything about that typo in the subject
line. I get visions of a dangerous baby...
--
Bart.
