Re: JRuby invokedynamic updates

2011-08-15 Thread Tom Rodriguez
On Aug 15, 2011, at 3:19 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Tom Rodriguez > wrote: >> >> On Aug 12, 2011, at 4:15 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: >>> Well, let me play devil's advocate here: why not just discount MH >>> chains completely? >> >> It really only

Auto Reply: Auto Reply: Re: JRuby invokedynamic updates

2011-08-15 Thread bernard . traversat
This is an auto-replied message. I am out of the office until Aug 22nd with limited access to email and phone. ___ mlvm-dev mailing list mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev

Auto Reply: Re: JRuby invokedynamic updates

2011-08-15 Thread bernard . traversat
This is an auto-replied message. I am out of the office until Aug 22nd with limited access to email and phone. ___ mlvm-dev mailing list mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev

Re: JRuby invokedynamic updates

2011-08-15 Thread Charles Oliver Nutter
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Tom Rodriguez wrote: > > On Aug 12, 2011, at 4:15 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: >> Well, let me play devil's advocate here: why not just discount MH >> chains completely? > > It really only to deal with pathologically long chains.  Most method handle > chains a

Re: JRuby invokedynamic updates

2011-08-15 Thread Tom Rodriguez
On Aug 12, 2011, at 4:15 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote: > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Tom Rodriguez > wrote: >> I wonder if we need to be slightly more selective than this. Most method >> handle chains are relatively small and we shouldn't be penalized for that >> but they could be ar