Hello All! I recently posted on LtU asking for help with a type inference question, and was directed here to talk about BitC.
First I should say I was pleasantly surprised to discover BitC - the overlap with my own project was a bit shocking, in a good way. It's nice to see that others are thinking in the same 'space' that I do, makes it less lonely. Last night I read the "Origins of BitC" paper, and was loudly agreeing with just about every point made in there. BitC appears to be muuuuch further along than I am, but it also seems to have a pretty big footprint. Whereas BitC is several MB of code, the Irken tarball is a piddling 150KB of Python code. It would be wrong to call it more than a 'prototype' by comparison. 8^) I've been trying to get BitC running... first I made the mistake of trying it on osx/ppc (something related to gc has not been ported?) then tried freebsd/x86 - some kind of bison problem. Ok, now to my issue with the C stack. Am I correct in thinking that BitC generates separate C functions and uses the C calling convention? As I said in my other post to LtU, I want to avoid the big disconnect between the high-level and low-level languages. My plan is to implement call/cc in the low-level language and use it in both levels. Things I'd like to have in both languages: lightweight threads continuations generators exceptions ability to dump and load an image marshalling a continuation, maybe sending it to another machine massive scalability (and thus a small footprint per 'thread') My target applications are things like network servers (http/smtp/dns/etc) and possibly things like servers for MMO's. -Sam _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
