Thomas E Enebo wrote:
This makes me wonder if we cannot actually ascertain the cost of
various locking/volatile/active/inactive scenarios. Of course in a
pet micro bench of these it may give an unrealistic answer, but it
would still be cool to get some understanding of cost.
Yeah, we need to
On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Thomas E Enebo wrote:
> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
> wrote:
>> Subramanya Sastry wrote:
>>>
>>> I may have been wrong. I had a chance to think through this a little bit
>>> more.
>>>
>>> Consider this ruby code:
>>>
>>> i = 5
>>> v1 =
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
wrote:
> Subramanya Sastry wrote:
>>
>> I may have been wrong. I had a chance to think through this a little bit
>> more.
>>
>> Consider this ruby code:
>>
>> i = 5
>> v1 = i + 1
>> some_random_method_call()
>> v2 = i + 1
>>
>> In this code
Subramanya Sastry wrote:
I may have been wrong. I had a chance to think through this a little
bit more.
Consider this ruby code:
i = 5
v1 = i + 1
some_random_method_call()
v2 = i + 1
In this code snippet, the second '+' might not get optimized because
'some_random_method_call' could monkey
> Here 'call' could be a regular C call for all you care. So, what would
>> happen in the compiler is that you would first transform the code into
>> a higher-level IR (with virtual calls as above), and at some point in the
>> optimization, you will ratchet down the IR one level lower that might
>
Subramanya Sastry wrote:
This note interweaves code optimization with discussion about IR because
the IR choice will be influenced by what you want to do with it. I am
going to use examples below to guide this discussion. A lot of it is
somewhat 'stream-of-thought' writing -- this is not a tigh
This note interweaves code optimization with discussion about IR because
the IR choice will be influenced by what you want to do with it. I am
going to use examples below to guide this discussion. A lot of it is
somewhat 'stream-of-thought' writing -- this is not a tight spec.
Since we let HotSp
