Fredrik Öhrström a écrit :
> Charles Oliver Nutter skrev:
>
>> I must also remark how similar this feels to LLVM's method invocation
>> APIs, where they toss "function" objects into the IR and it just
>> optimizes the calling logic. It seems to me that the new indy stuff
>> could be the underpin
Frank Wierzbicki wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In my experiments it seems like even the simplest invokedynamic calls
> will crash in the presence of an initialized jython.
>
> To reproduce:
>
> co https://jython.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/jython/trunk/jython
> ant jar-complete
>
> put the [jython]/dist
Rémi Forax wrote:
> If you take a close look to the current API:
> http://download.java.net/jdk7/docs/api/java/dyn/MethodHandles.html
> there are not lot of primitive adapters, i.e adapters that can not be
> written from
> the others.
Are these all functional right now? I could obviously use guar
Rémi Forax skrev:
> In that case, guards etc can be implemented using only convert, spread
> and collect and the JavaMethodHandle.
>
If you have collect/spread that converts each array element,
then you do not need the JavaMethodHandle.
> But, for my pet project, for Groovy or for Neal's closur
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter
> Are there perhaps additional patches above and beyond what's in jdk7
> that are needed? You might give it a shot with MLVM additions and
> bsd-port base, maybe.
I'm running on Linux, so the bsd-ports wouldn't apply (right?) -- are
there any
Frank Wierzbicki wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter
>> Are there perhaps additional patches above and beyond what's in jdk7
>> that are needed? You might give it a shot with MLVM additions and
>> bsd-port base, maybe.
> I'm running on Linux, so the bsd-ports wouldn't a
Charles Oliver Nutter a écrit :
> Rémi Forax wrote:
>
>> If you take a close look to the current API:
>> http://download.java.net/jdk7/docs/api/java/dyn/MethodHandles.html
>> there are not lot of primitive adapters, i.e adapters that can not be
>> written from
>> the others.
>>
>
> Are the
Charles Oliver Nutter a écrit :
> FYI, for JRuby I did not use langtools and instead pulled the branch
> of ASM that supports invokedynamic. It did need an additional patch,
> however, since it was not properly calculating stack manipulations.
>
> The branch is here:
>
> svn://svn.forge.objectweb
Rémi Forax wrote:
> Ok, I've forget to update that code when the encoding of invokedynamic
> bytecode change.
> I haven't applied your patch because I think it is simpler to use a
> specific case for INVOKEDYNAMIC.
No problem...when you've applied your change let me know and I'll update.
I don'
On May 19, 2009, at 2:17 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> I don't think there's going to be any more changes at the bytecode
> level, right? Can we get this pushed into an ASM release soon?
Anything's possible, but I don't expect the current format to change.
-- John
__
On May 19, 2009, at 1:00 AM, Rémi Forax wrote:
> The purpose of primitive adapters is to hep the language developer
> to fight
> the inherent complexity of dealing with polymorphic signature.
Yes, that's the key point.
As Fredrik says, you can hide the polymorphism by going to a
reflective (
On May 19, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> The MLVM patches are now rebased to bsd-port, so if you wanted to
> apply
> them you'd want to build off bsd-port (which builds just fine on Linux
> too). It would also be worth at least checking what's in the current
> patch set, since
John Rose wrote:
> The combineArguments combinator is both polymorphic and pretty nearly
> universal (without boxing). I hope to implement it mostly "in the
> metal", under the name "flyby adapter". The idea is you get a
> subroutine to witness the full argument list and make some
> compu
I've reproduced your crash from the command line; thanks for the clean
instructions.
The crash is for:
def foo(a); end; a = 1; while a < 1_000_000; foo(a); a += 1; end
There is a basic nbproject in the jruby repo, but no debug or run
targets.
Is there a secret combination to getting a deb
John Rose a écrit :
> On May 19, 2009, at 2:17 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
>
>
>> I don't think there's going to be any more changes at the bytecode
>> level, right? Can we get this pushed into an ASM release soon?
>>
>
> Anything's possible, but I don't expect the current format to ch
Thanks! -- John
On May 18, 2009, at 8:41 PM, Frank Wierzbicki wrote:
> I will try to narrow this down further tomorrow, maybe I can find a
> simple subset of Jython that triggers these crashes.
___
mlvm-dev mailing list
mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net
http:
On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 6:14 PM, John Rose wrote:
> For language integration work, we should all be building from the MLVM
> patch repo, since it is a few steps in advance of the JDK7 repo.
>
> There is a small amount of new stuff beyond JDK7 (b59, M3) in there
> now, and I am collecting more stuf
Frank Wierzbicki wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 6:14 PM, John Rose wrote:
>> For language integration work, we should all be building from the MLVM
>> patch repo, since it is a few steps in advance of the JDK7 repo.
>>
>> There is a small amount of new stuff beyond JDK7 (b59, M3) in there
>> now
Check in netbeans-ant.xml, there should be one or more debug targets in
there and instructions on how to modify the JRuby command line. I
*think* they still work, but I don't use NB debugging much.
Note that it's passing the arguments directly to 'java' and
org.jruby.Main, so JVM args would be
19 matches
Mail list logo
