--- Stéphane Payrard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > With Perl6, few people will compile whole librairies but most > will load bytecode. At this late stage there is little place for > tunable optimization except JITting or it would defeat the > sharing of such code between different intances of Perl6. Nothing > will preclude to dynamically extend classes. I note that in Perl6 > many optimizations were autoloading for deferring compilation of > material until it's really needed. With bytecode, it makes sense > (at least optimization-wise) that the programmer decides if his > classes will be sealed or some methods to be final because at the > user level it is too late to decide.
This speaks rather directly to AOP, and to some code metering applications. Being able to do this kind of stuff requires having a nonoptimized version of the code available. I wonder if it makes sense to provide potentially many variants of the compiled code: source, nonopt bytes, opt bytes, and WIA platform? (Alternatively, this might be a hellish nightmare, but I suspect that it would be nice to have "run fast" versions of XML::whatever, and then "single-step" versions.) =Austin
