I see. Thanks for the links, Greg Morrisett's notes are a great survey of possible approaches to this problem. It is funny because I had also come to the conclusion that JIT was the neater solution, as long as JIT is available with the runtime... and you don't have to implement it -- I guess it's even more complex than doing runtime dictionary passing. Has there been experiments using LLVM's JIT to implement polymorphism in Rust? I'm not sure about the cost of JIT, though. Maybe it would not make sense in Rust. Well, at least there should still be the static monomorphization option.
2014-07-26 5:31 GMT+02:00 Patrick Walton <[email protected]>: > On 7/25/14 8:26 PM, Patrick Walton wrote: > >> Uniform value representations work well too (as >> OCaml shows), but of course you'll pay a performance cost for that. >> > > Oh, note that Greg's notes are a little bit out of date when discussing > the performance tradeoffs of uniform value representation. On 64 bit (and > even on 32 bit) you can do NaN-boxed "fatvals" [1] (scroll down to > "Mozilla's New JavaScript Value Representation") which avoid having to box > every floating point value. > > Patrick > > [1] http://evilpie.github.io/sayrer-fatval-backup/cache.aspx.htm > > > _______________________________________________ > Rust-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev >
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
