At 06:56 PM 8/12/2002 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: >Here's a more interesting question: which parts of Parrot are enshrined, >and which are prototypes, ready to be thrown away? For instance, I'd >say much of languages/* is all proof-of-concept prototype stuff; imcc >may not be. The assembler I'd call a prototype. The regex engine? The >GC? ...
On that topic, given that the reference assembler is too slow for on-the-fly assembly, I already decided that imcc should get its own C based assembler. Now that the C (XS) interface is gone, it means we will be duplicating code. I'm not saying the Perl based assembler is a BAD thing, but I think time spent "tuning" the reference assembler is wasted when it could be spent writing a really fast one in C. -Melvin
