> holger krekel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Re-Hi! > > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 21:53 +0100, Armin Rigo wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 09:43:26PM +0100, holger krekel wrote: > >> > Good point which i indeed had forgotten about. Also regarding GCs > >> > it is higher level than C. So probably we need oo + part-of-lltypes :) > >> > >> You keep inserting lltype here -- probably just out of our > >> well-established habit of loving confusion :-) ootype contains > >> lltype-ish aspects of its own, because all OO target languages that we > >> have in mind need these aspects. There is nothing special about IL -- > >> certainly not anything that would make it different than C#, as far as I > >> can tell. > > > > didn't intend to doubt the latter. But I guess i need to > > refresh/improve my knowledge of ootypes. > > A particular, relevant fact here is that the ootypesystem and the > lltypesystem are not disjoint -- they share at least the Primitives, > which is to say the representations of integers, floats, etc. >
Hi Michael, Does the ootypesystem has high level representations of lists and dicts yet? Would that perhaps be a good thing for me to try to implement as a way of helping out? Cheers, Ben > Cheers, > mwh > > -- > 112. Computer Science is embarrassed by the computer. > -- Alan Perlis, http://www.cs.yale.edu/homes/perlis-alan/quotes.html > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] > http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev > _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
