On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
wrote:
> Looks good so far reading the ast --ir output. A few things on which I
> could use clarification:
>
> * Binding variable load/stores are unconditionally done before/after
> block calls, yes? Opportunity to optimize or failover to all b
Ok, bug or something...
* The StoreLocalVariable and LoadLocalVariable seem to use a
zero-based offset for depth but a one-based offset for index into the
binding. Intentional? I will subtract one for now.
I am implementing this without context.push/pop and exception-handling
logic for the moment
Looks good so far reading the ast --ir output. A few things on which I
could use clarification:
* Binding variable load/stores are unconditionally done before/after
block calls, yes? Opportunity to optimize or failover to all binding
variables if we see there's a lot of churn?
* Are all variables
I will look into this a bit tonight and see if I can get basic binding
logic implemented in IR2JVM. Thanks, Subbu!
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Subramanya Sastry wrote:
> I started working on implementing an explicit call protocol last week.
> It required me to clean up a few other bits which
