Re: libjit

Rhys Weatherley wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 October 2004 07:55 pm, Leopold Toetsch wrote:

> > Thanks for the link. But I think, while the idea is quite nice, it's not
> > really useful for us.
>
> Probably true.  Parrot is far enough along that changing fundamentals like 
> this wouldn't be wise.
>
>
> > It looks rather mono-specific and is (of course) running a stack machine.
>
> There is another .NET implementation besides Mono, you know.  Libjit is an 
> off-shoot of the DotGNU Portable.NET project.

Sorry, yes of course. I'm always mixing these two projects.

> Libjit internally uses three-address statements, similar to IMCC, to express 
> the internal representation.  Then the usual three-address optimizations, 
> register allocation, and code generation is performed.

Yep. Well, a low-level libjit-like library would be interesting, though. 
One that just translates three-address statements to machine language.

> One of the back ends is an interpreted stack machine instruction set.  

Yes, I saw that.

> But if I'm retrofitting a JIT into an existing VM, I think Parrot would be 
> more trouble than it is worth.  But that's just me.  There's plenty of room 
> for both approaches.  Time will tell.

Of course. VMs are written for specific languages, they tend to become 
very specific for one language and probably hard to use for a different 
one. Parrot should be able to run a lot of dynamic languages ...

> Cheers,
>
> Rhys.

leo