>>>>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> so my take on that is that each module would compile to a byte stream
>> which has its own private op code table to dispatch ALL op code
>> functions called by this module. so the same op code index in two
>> different modules can (and probably will) map to different functions.
DS> Yup, though strictly speaking it's not on a per-module basis. If
DS> you compiled an entire program, from source, with all its modules,
DS> in one go and froze the whole mass to disk, you'd only have one
DS> opcode table. Of course, having said that, we're probably going to
DS> encourage folks to use the shared versions of modules, so we
DS> probably will ultimately end up with one table per module, more or
DS> less.
hmmm. that implies some way of forcing all the modules to load and no
main code to be executed before you dump the byte code. in compiling
each module you have to be aware that they will be using the main
dispatch table and not to create a private one perl module. this is sort
of a compile/link phase in one operation.
we need a document soon describing the creation and use of the dispatch
tables. we have a fairly clear group vision but not enough on paper.
dan, do you have this in mind as a pdd? does someone feel like taking it
on?
uri
--
Uri Guttman --------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------- http://www.sysarch.com
SYStems ARCHitecture and Stem Development ------ http://www.stemsystems.com
Search or Offer Perl Jobs -------------------------- http://jobs.perl.org
