Below are some considerations WRT current opcode count.
leo
Too many opcodes
gcc 2.95.4 doesn't compile the switch core optimized. People have
repeatedly reported about troubles with the CGoto core - now the CGP
core is as big and compiles as slow.
I'm not speaking of the pain (and the
Matt Fowles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leo~
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 04:55:24 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've clearly stated that lexicals aka non-volatiles have distinct
registers.
Thus for these large subs, won't this be a large overhead?
Why? It's actually less overhead.
Bill Coffman wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:26:39 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keep in mind that you don't actually have to add all those CFG edges.
You already know precisely the effects of adding them. All
non-volatile symbols (those crossing subs that might make
IMCC yells at me when I say:
.namespace [ Foo ]
.sub new
...
.end
While it's tolerable for local symbols, subs really have to be
named according to the interface. Is it possible to allow:
.sub new
...
.end
?
Thanks,
Luke
Since there is a syntax for invoking subs:
.sub foo
# ...
.end
.sub bar
foo()
.end
Should there be one for invoking a sub out of a namespace, say:
.namespace [ Foo ]
.sub bar
# ...
.end
.namespace [ Baz ]
.sub quux
[ Foo, bar ]()
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leopold Toetsch):
Ben Morrow wrote:
Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
RESUMABLE: func_that_might_loop_through_cc()
possibly accompanied with another markup of the function call that
loops back.
That can't work, because *any* function might loop back,
# New Ticket Created by prashanth babu
# Please include the string: [perl #32590]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=32590
hi everybody,
how to set the rights for queues, groups and users..
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Sure. But I've no confirmation of a compiler writer that its possible.
Annotating PIR can only work for nested closures. If libraries are
involved you are out of luck.
And we have such code already in library/Streams/Sub.imc.
I've been thinking of what could be
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 09:39:27AM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Bill Coffman wrote:
Another interesting thing about this problem is that these new CFG
edges are rarely, or at least with low probability, ever travelled.
We just don't know it, rare or not doesn't matter.
I'm probably going
On Tue, Nov 23, 2004 at 11:40:07PM -0800, prashanth babu wrote:
# New Ticket Created by prashanth babu
# Please include the string: [perl #32590]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=32590
Â
hi
Luke Palmer wrote:
Since there is a syntax for invoking subs:
.sub foo
# ...
.end
.sub bar
foo()
.end
Should there be one for invoking a sub out of a namespace, say:
.namespace [ Foo ]
.sub bar
# ...
.end
.namespace [ Baz ]
.sub quux
[ Foo, bar ]()
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Should there be one for invoking a sub out of a namespace, say:
.namespace [ Baz ]
.sub quux
[ Foo, bar ]()
Looks a bit strange.
Class methods already have their namespaces. For subs we could do:
.locale pmc ns, ns_foo
ns =
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMCC yells at me when I say:
.namespace [ Foo ]
.sub new
...
.end
While it's tolerable for local symbols, subs really have to be
named according to the interface. Is it possible to allow:
.sub new
...
.end
Should be rather simple, yes.
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
+-+--+
| ctp | interpreter state|
+-+--+
|
++
|
+--+-+---+--+
| prev | ctx | lexicals | volatiles|
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 09:45:27AM -0500, Ken Fox wrote:
As long as an architecture change is on the
table, might as well make it a doozy.
Quite a lot of us would just like parrot COMPLETE and CORRECT before
starting to put a lot of effort into how fast it is.
PLEASE
Ken Fox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
+-+--+
| ctp | interpreter state|
+-+--+
|
++
|
+--+-+---+--+
| prev | ctx |
Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm probably going to get shot for suggesting this, but if each interpreter
has a count of the number of full continuations invoked (ie non-return
continuations), then I think that we can know when we *haven't*.
Nobody gets shot - and - interesting
Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 09:45:27AM -0500, Ken Fox wrote:
As long as an architecture change is on the
table, might as well make it a doozy.
Quite a lot of us would just like parrot COMPLETE and CORRECT before
starting to put a
Leo~
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:42:31 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And as a side effect it will make Dan's evils subs compile, because
long-lived lexicals already have their storage aka register. Only temps
need a register allocated.
What happens to temps that need to cross
Luke Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... Is it possible to allow:
.sub new
...
.end
Done. Including:
$I0 = new()
Please note that currently the name of the PMC sub constant is passed
to PackFile code via sprintf/sscanf. This means that spaces and such are
not allowed, yet.
BTW it
Matt Fowles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leo~
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:42:31 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And as a side effect it will make Dan's evils subs compile, because
long-lived lexicals already have their storage aka register. Only temps
need a register allocated.
What
Leo~
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:25:05 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matt Fowles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Leo~
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:42:31 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
And as a side effect it will make Dan's evils subs compile, because
long-lived
Dan Sugalski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't. My dev machine's running gcc 2.95.4, and gcc throws lisp
error messages compiling the switch core if I turn on optimizations.
I've checked in a hook in ops2c.pl that splits the switched core all 300
ops. If that works, we can provide some config
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:39:27 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill Coffman wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:26:39 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Keep in mind that you don't actually have to add all those CFG edges.
You already know precisely the effects of
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 15:04 +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
Quite a lot of us would just like parrot COMPLETE and CORRECT before
starting to put a lot of effort into how fast it is.
I'd settle for it compiling (#32514). If not for the broken build, I'd
have poked at three or four small TODO
Matt Fowles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:25:05 +0100, Leopold Toetsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
a = b + c + foo()
I am not sure that they are as rare as you think.
Does it matter? They are no lexicals, you can't refetch them. So they
get a distinct storage. When foo() is
Chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2004-11-24 at 15:04 +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
Quite a lot of us would just like parrot COMPLETE and CORRECT before
starting to put a lot of effort into how fast it is.
I'd settle for it compiling (#32514).
Well, having just a short look at the
Bill Coffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
two possible interferences of different kinds, with additional coding
overhead ...
... What makes it a
little complicated is how do these ubiquetous symbols interact with
the non-ubuiquitous? Those arcs are needed for this.
Yes that's what I've
Well, it's the first time *I've* seen it.
http://otierney.net/images/perl6.gif
I find it difficult to disagree, at the perl6 language
level. Here's to hoping something sensible emerges from
Parrot, at least. :)
F.
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 03:42:48PM -0500, Felix Gallo wrote:
Well, it's the first time *I've* seen it.
http://otierney.net/images/perl6.gif
I find it difficult to disagree, at the perl6 language
level. Here's to hoping something sensible emerges from
Parrot, at least. :)
The original is
On 11/24/04 3:42 PM, Felix Gallo wrote:
Well, it's the first time *I've* seen it.
http://otierney.net/images/perl6.gif
I find it difficult to disagree, at the perl6 language level.
I don't :) Judging by the Perl 6 RFCs, I think that book cover would be
accurate if the community really did
Ah, I've made Parrot build again on Linux PPC (and make testj only has
the expected t/library/streams.t failure present with make test too).
The attached file works as the eventual src/platform_asm.s file, at
least on my architecture. I'm not sure how to plug it in to the
generated fileset
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 04:25:14PM -0500, John Siracusa wrote:
On 11/24/04 3:42 PM, Felix Gallo wrote:
Well, it's the first time *I've* seen it.
http://otierney.net/images/perl6.gif
I find it difficult to disagree, at the perl6 language level.
I don't :) Judging by the Perl 6
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 06:30:29PM -0500, Felix Gallo wrote:
2. perl 6 is a lot cleaner than perl 5. It's also much, much
larger than an already very large language. I've been programming
and evangelizing Perl in organizations small and gigantic since
4.03x, and my eyes just glaze over at
# New Ticket Created by Herbert Snorrason
# Please include the string: [perl #32605]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# URL: http://rt.perl.org:80/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=32605
The parrotcode.org website has an 'Examples' section, which
(currently)
On 11/24/04 7:27 PM, Tim Bunce wrote:
I predict a burst of wild creativity from authors enjoying the
exploration of all the wonderful tools in the perl6 toolbox.
Then, after a year or three of fun, sawn off limbs, and bloodied
fingers (and after a few good books get published) most of us
hi,everyone.
I am learning parrot0.0.1 source code. But i don't know padding in
assemble.pl?
$size += length($_) % $sizeof_packi; # Padding ??? why need to pad?
who help ?
bloves
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
2004-11-25
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 06:30:29PM -0500, Felix Gallo wrote:
2. perl 6 is a lot cleaner than perl 5. It's also much, much
larger than an already very large language. I've been programming
and evangelizing Perl in organizations small and gigantic since
4.03x, and my eyes just glaze over at
Fglock @ Pucrs . Br [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The preprocessor changes pmc to a previously
used identifier:
$ ./parrot -E -# invoke preprocessor
Ouch, the preprocessor is far behind the current syntax. It needs either
updating or disabling.
Thanks for reporting,
leo
Brian Wheeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I noticed a hole in the io.ops where the PIO stuff wasn't covered. This
patch creates an eof opcode which checks for end of file.
Please just use the eof method of the PIO object:
$I0 = $P0.eof()
leo
Chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah, I've made Parrot build again on Linux PPC (and make testj only has
the expected t/library/streams.t failure present with make test too).
He he, great.
The attached file works as the eventual src/platform_asm.s file, at
least on my architecture. I'm
Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 09:20:42AM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
2) Opcode variants with mixed arguments
Honestly
acos Nx, Iy
and tons of other such opcodes are just overkill.
Heck, why do we even have transcendental maths ops that take integer
42 matches
Mail list logo
