On Friday, 21 December 2012 at 10:37:05 UTC, Araq wrote:
On Friday, 21 December 2012 at 10:30:21 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
On 12/21/2012 2:13 AM, Max Samukha wrote:
What Walter is wrong about is that bytecode is entirely
pointless.
I'll bite. What is its advantage over source code?
Interpreting the AST directly: Requires recursion.
Interpreting a (stack based) bytecode: Does not require
recursion.
That's what an AST to bytecode tranformation does; it
eliminates the recursion. And that is far from being useless.
It don't think that this is such a big deal. Either way you need
one stack: either the call stack or the stack machine's stack. It
doesn't seem to make a big difference.
Am I wrong?
