2013/5/22 Frank Shearar <[email protected]> > Why does ifTrue: use a compile-time transformation?
But what makes #future be similar to "ifTrue" case? What makes it so special? > There are LOTS of > places where the Compiler (I can't speak for Opal, but it's almost > certainly true of Pharo's Compiler unless you've already rewritten the > whole thing before Opal) does all manner of code transformations. > > As for why, and what benchmarks, drop Josh Gargus or Ron Teitelbaum a > mail. This stuff landed in Squeak via Croquet. > > frank > > On 22 May 2013 06:35, Denis Kudriashov <[email protected]> wrote: > > Why Future required compiler changes? > > What problem to implement #future message as any other method? > > If it is about performance can you explain why basic implementation > should > > have bad speed? And what benchmarks was used to verify it? > > > > 2013/5/22 David T. Lewis <[email protected]> > > > >> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 06:26:04PM +0200, Marcus Denker wrote: > >> > > >> > No, I know nothing about the Future implementation in Squeak? but > >> > a Future node in the AST sounds extremely strange. > >> > >> I think that the background may be found in this thread: > >> > >> > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2009-December/142111.html > >> > >> Dave > >> > >> > > > >
