[M3devel] [M3commit] CVS Update: cm3

[Jay K]

 > I'd like to, if I only knew how.  I'd be really interested in having the
 > low-level infrastructure for JIT code generators
 Would you be satisfied with a Modula-3 interpreter that interpreted a mostly-compiled form?It shouldn't be difficult.I don't know if our intermediate code was designed with interpretation in mind, but it seemslike it wouldn't be particularly difficult.You'd want a "linker" that just zips all the files and puts it "in" or "next to" the stub executable.  This would solve the distribution format problem, partly.The existing intermediate code is platform-specific, but not by much (again: jumpbuf size, word size, endian,win32 vs. posix).  But I have to admit, I'm keener on generating C than a JIT or an interpreter, andinterpreter is not JIT.  Um. What do you hope to gain from JIT?A big reason I ask..is because..well, do you want to ship some portable-executable that relieson JIT being already installed/available? Or do you want to carry the JITer and its code together?Or do you want to target an existing widely deployed JITer such as CLR or Java?  In my opinion, the biggest advantage of JIT is portable-executable, depending on widely deployed JITer.But targeting CLR or Java isn't as easy as targeting your own custom thing.  I understand there are other advantages -- faster compilation, optimization very specific to runtime environment.But I think portable-executable is most important. That's why I like "script". :)There are disadvantages to JIT: slower execution/startup, maybe harder to debug, easy to reverse engineer (if you care).  Heck, at some point you just ship the compiler and portable-executable is source code.There are pluses and minuses all around.    - Jay 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://m3lists.elegosoft.com/pipermail/m3devel/attachments/20120608/a31c6e21/attachment-0002.html>