On 8/21/2011 2:32 PM, Carl Friedrich Bolz wrote:
Solving the problem of persisting source code is *seriously* hard, and
I agree with Armin, I'm not going to invest any time in it.
One interesting side note: The implementors of v8 decided that the best
and most compact representation of sourc
On 08/21/2011 07:49 PM, Zooko O'Whielacronx wrote:
[following-up to my own post]
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Zooko O'Whielacronx wrote:
The behavior of a program is a deterministic function of its source
code, right? So if the source code (*all* of it -- everything that
gets imported an
[following-up to my own post]
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Zooko O'Whielacronx wrote:
>
> The behavior of a program is a deterministic function of its source
> code, right? So if the source code (*all* of it -- everything that
> gets imported and executed at any point during the run of the p
Dear Armin Rigo:
Thank you for your reply.
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 3:39 AM, Armin Rigo wrote:
>
> So no, there is no way at all to make this idea work in general; you
> can only do hacks that hopefully don't break too often. I am not
> interested :-)
I also wouldn't be interested in techniques
Hi Zooko,
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Zooko O'Whielacronx wrote:
> conservative method of determining if two classes are the same. For
> example: if they have identical Python source code and their
> superclasses are the same (in this sense).
This cannot be something you can rely on. I can
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 1:56 PM, David Fraser wrote:
> The pypy JIT takes a while to work out which parts of python code need
> optimization etc, and only after that phase do the speedups become relevant.
> Have there been any efforts (indeed, is it a feasible idea at all) that look
> at saving
On Friday, August 19, 2011 at 3:40:24 PM, "Harald Armin Massa"
wrote:
> >> The pypy JIT takes a while to work out which parts of python code
> >> need optimization etc,
>
> > No, this is not really doable. The JIT writes explicitly in the
> > assembler the address of a ton of constants.
>
> co
On Friday, August 19, 2011 at 3:32:07 PM, "Armin Rigo" wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 1:56 PM, David Fraser
> wrote:
> > The pypy JIT takes a while to work out which parts of python code
> > need optimization etc, and only after that phase do the speedups
> > become relevant. H
>> The pypy JIT takes a while to work out which parts of python code need
>> optimization etc,
> No, this is not really doable. The JIT writes explicitly in the
> assembler the address of a ton of constants.
could a special "logging area" be of use? as in
JIT decides foo_do_something_often() i
Hi David,
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 1:56 PM, David Fraser wrote:
> The pypy JIT takes a while to work out which parts of python code need
> optimization etc, and only after that phase do the speedups become relevant.
> Have there been any efforts (indeed, is it a feasible idea at all) that look
Hi
This is a fairly naive question from a newbie...
The pypy JIT takes a while to work out which parts of python code need
optimization etc, and only after that phase do the speedups become relevant.
Have there been any efforts (indeed, is it a feasible idea at all) that look at
saving these o
11 matches
Mail list logo
