[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fun-O Basic Edition Compiler

To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: Fun-O Basic Edition Compiler
From: Jeffrey Siegal <address@hidden>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 09:05:02 -0500 (EST)
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
References: <200112211641.LAA28762@life.ai.mit.edu> <3C276FAF.F89966B9@mediaone.net> <3C28F100.9478041B@mediaone.net> <bruce-67C098.17432626122001@news.paradise.net.nz> <3C2A2420.2010404@quiotix.com> <bruce-3E2970.12141727122001@news.paradise.net.nz> <3C2A9248.8CB924BF@quiotix.com> <bruce-B23ADA.17194527122001@news.paradise.net.nz>
Xref: traf.lcs.mit.edu comp.lang.dylan:13879

Bruce Hoult wrote:
> > However, with some minor tuning effort, I get similar efficiency
> > out of Stalin on larger Scheme programs as well (50-100KLOC)
> 
> How does it do on optimizing object systems built from raw closures (or
> otherwise...)?

It usually inlines the methods when they're statically resolvable, as in
Dylan.  What happens is that the case (or whatever dispatcher) gets
inlined and then constant folded away.

References:
- Re: Fun-O Basic Edition Compiler
  - From: Jeffrey Siegal <jbs@quiotix.com>
- Re: Fun-O Basic Edition Compiler
  - From: Bruce Hoult <bruce@hoult.org>
- Re: Fun-O Basic Edition Compiler
  - From: Jeffrey Siegal <jbs@quiotix.com>
- Re: Fun-O Basic Edition Compiler
  - From: Bruce Hoult <bruce@hoult.org>

Prev by Date: Re: New Lisp ?
Next by Date: Re: New Lisp ?
Previous by thread: Re: Fun-O Basic Edition Compiler
Next by thread: Re: Fun-O Basic Edition Compiler
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread