Hi Christian
you mention
the only way I can think of to make this available to users is an
annotation.
Since I am writing my own bytecodes/classes I am not limited to how the
java language might do this.
If there is a way for me to tweak the class file to pass the request to
hotspot th
On Apr 25, 2012, at 11:03 AM, Mark Roos wrote:
> From Christian
>
> Although something that John and I talked about yesterday could help here:
> immutable (or stable) arrays. We might add some optimization for this soon
> since we'd need it for bound arguments in our new JSR 292 implementat
>From Christian
Although something that John and I talked about yesterday could help here:
immutable (or stable) arrays. We might add some optimization for this
soon since we'd need it for bound arguments in our new JSR 292
implementation.
I also have a somewhat large ( 5K) cache of my boxe
On 04/25/2012 07:23 PM, Fredrik Öhrström wrote:
>>> That's a lot of optimization that I otherwise wouldn't have to do, if
>>> only boxed types and constant propagation worked well, but yeah, I see
>>> how it can work now.
> Clearly the C1/C2 compiler needs to be improved. In the meantime
> you have
On 04/25/2012 10:23 AM, Fredrik Öhrström wrote:
>>> That's a lot of optimization that I otherwise wouldn't have to do, if
>>> only boxed types and constant propagation worked well, but yeah, I see
>>> how it can work now.
>
> Clearly the C1/C2 compiler needs to be improved. In the meantime
> you
>> That's a lot of optimization that I otherwise wouldn't have to do, if
>> only boxed types and constant propagation worked well, but yeah, I see
>> how it can work now.
Clearly the C1/C2 compiler needs to be improved. In the meantime
you have to work around their limitations.
> BTW, I've patche
On 04/25/2012 06:38 PM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
> On Apr 23, 2012, at 4:29 PM, Rémi Forax wrote:
>
>> On 04/24/2012 12:57 AM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
>>> On 04/23/2012 11:18 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
> So again, I don't see how shifting from method handle tree to byte
> code generation woul
On Apr 23, 2012, at 4:29 PM, Rémi Forax wrote:
> On 04/24/2012 12:57 AM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
>> On 04/23/2012 11:18 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
So again, I don't see how shifting from method handle tree to byte
code generation would somehow make this non-issue.
>>>
>>> In fact, it's eas
On 04/24/2012 01:43 AM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
>
> Any chance you can share that patch with us? It'd give me some
> pointers into poking around JDK code, now that I learned how to build
> it...
Sure, it's easy, in ciField.cpp, there is a method named
trust_final_non_static_fields(),
you can a
Any chance you can share that patch with us? It'd give me some pointers
into poking around JDK code, now that I learned how to build it...
On 04/23/2012 04:29 PM, Rémi Forax wrote:
> On 04/24/2012 12:57 AM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
>> On 04/23/2012 11:18 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
So again, I
On 04/24/2012 12:57 AM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
> On 04/23/2012 11:18 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
>>> So again, I don't see how shifting from method handle tree to byte
>>> code generation would somehow make this non-issue.
>>
>> In fact, it's easy to know that a.foo() is a boolean because
>> && can
On 04/23/2012 11:18 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
>> So again, I don't see how shifting from method handle tree to byte
>> code generation would somehow make this non-issue.
>
> In fact, it's easy to know that a.foo() is a boolean because
> && can be only applied on booleans so the invokedynamic call
>
On 04/23/2012 06:37 PM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
> 2012/4/22 Rémi Forax:
>>> So as you can see, 30 and 12 are not recognized as constants.
>> You're right, 30 and 12 are not recognized as int constant
>> but they are recognized as java/lang/Integer constant.
>>
>> 0x7f785ca29706: mov$0x7d66
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
> Let me try my question in another way, given this context.
>
> In p.11 of Nahi's JRuby/invokedynamic presentation [1], I see that
> JRuby already does something to make Ruby constants (or "variables
> that gets updated less frequently" as
2012/4/23 Charles Oliver Nutter :
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
>> You are the first as far as I know to use only a tree of method handles
>> to implement expressions. The rest of us generates bytecodes
>> and have a compiler that does constant propagation.
>
> JRuby doesn't
Thanks for sharing your experience. That's interesting.
Now that you mention it, I can kind of see how the boxing overhead
doesn't affect Hanoi that much. It only deals with a small set of
integers, so they'll be all quickly on CPU cache (along with the
lookup table). And if I remember Hanoi corre
2012/4/22 Rémi Forax :
>> So as you can see, 30 and 12 are not recognized as constants.
>
> You're right, 30 and 12 are not recognized as int constant
> but they are recognized as java/lang/Integer constant.
>
> 0x7f785ca29706: mov $0x7d66619d8,%r10 ; {oop(a 'java/ang/nteger' =
> 30)}
>
On 04/23/2012 12:34 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
>> You are the first as far as I know to use only a tree of method handles
>> to implement expressions. The rest of us generates bytecodes
>> and have a compiler that does constant propagation
On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
> You are the first as far as I know to use only a tree of method handles
> to implement expressions. The rest of us generates bytecodes
> and have a compiler that does constant propagation.
JRuby doesn't do any constant propagation in our existi
See inlined comments :)
On 04/22/2012 12:02 AM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was inspired by the talk by Charles in JAX 2012 and was playing with
> invokedynamic a bit. I'm observing what seems like a constant
> propagation failure, which I'd imagine would affect some important use
> cases
>From Kohsuke Kawaguchi email
- How do other language implementers cope with this?
We are doing a Smalltalk implementation and have seen that the handling of
'boxed' integers is a possible performance issue. I say possible because
while
it is an obvious issue for integer intensive operations (
Hi,
I was inspired by the talk by Charles in JAX 2012 and was playing with
invokedynamic a bit. I'm observing what seems like a constant
propagation failure, which I'd imagine would affect some important use
cases, so I wanted to check if I'm not doing something stupid.
I've used Apache JEXL [1]
22 matches
Mail list logo
