A message from our glorious ASM leader.
Rémi
Original Message
Subject:[asm] toward ASM 4.0
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 17:45:20 +0200
From: Eric Bruneton
To: a...@ow2.org
Hi,
we are about to release ASM 4.0. Compared to ASM 4.0 RC1, we mostly
renamed the packag
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 11:02 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter
wrote:
> I've added bench/bench_fib_complex.rb. This runs the original fib
> along with three variations:
>
> * One that uses constants for the literals 1 and 2 in the code
> * One that dispatches to other Ruby methods for the <, -, and + cal
As I start to look at the multithreading aspects of the Smalltalk
implementation I can see a situation where
two threads could be running down the GWT lookup path both looking for the
same implementation. I was
thinking of making the lookup synchronized but then what if two threads
are in the G
I was wondering what the expected differences are in the usage of these
two paths. The names imply something
but I find it confusing.
In my use case ( in line cache) one of the paths is directly into a method
handle to invoke and the other goes to
either another GWT or the lookup. Both should
On 08/11/2011 11:39 PM, Mark Roos wrote:
As I start to look at the multithreading aspects of the Smalltalk
implementation I can see a situation where
two threads could be running down the GWT lookup path both looking for
the same implementation. I was
thinking of making the lookup synchronized
On 08/11/2011 11:39 PM, Mark Roos wrote:
I was wondering what the expected differences are in the usage of
these two paths. The names imply something
but I find it confusing.
In my use case ( in line cache) one of the paths is directly into a
method handle to invoke and the other goes to
eith
Rémi asked
About reordering the chain of GWT, what do you want exactly ?
Well until the chain gets long enough to change to some form of table
lookup it
would be nice if the GWTs which have the most 'fast' path test successes
were moved
to the front of the chain. In this case the 'fast' path b
