I didn't figure I'd even get that far... It's mostly just for toying with the static backend, without the JIT.
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 11:02 PM, Armin Rigo <ar...@tunes.org> wrote: > Hi Ryan, > > On 4 March 2015 at 19:48, Ryan Gonzalez <rym...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Not necessarily. I figured that a C++ target might look a tad nicer > because > > it has built-in objects and exception handling. > > Yes, this might be true for the static backend. However, the JIT > integration would be extremely painful. To handle, let's say, the > exceptions you get from C++, you'd need to write custom assembler that > depends on the C++ compiler you used, full of non-standard binary data > like the "eh" sections produced by gcc. Similarly, there is no > standard way at all (as far as I know) to learn how to build a new > object from scratch (like get its vtable pointer and know where it > must be stored). You might start by learning how they manage to do > that in other VMs (like the various JVM), but my guess is that > although they are using C++ to write the VM, all Java-level objects > are implemented by controlling the exact layout of memory, not as C++ > objects at all. > > > A bientôt, > > Armin. > -- Ryan If anybody ever asks me why I prefer C++ to C, my answer will be simple: "It's becauseslejfp23(@#Q*(E*EIdc-SEGFAULT. Wait, I don't think that was nul-terminated." Personal reality distortion fields are immune to contradictory evidence. - srean Check out my website: http://kirbyfan64.github.io/
_______________________________________________ pypy-dev mailing list pypy-dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
