At 10:06 AM 5/30/2001 -0700, Hong Zhang wrote:
> > There's no reason why you can.t have a hybrid scheme. In fact I think
> > it's a big win over a pure register-addressing scheme. Consider...
>
>The hybrid scheme may be a win in some cases, but I am not sure if it
>worth the complexity. I personally prefer a strict RISC style opcodes,
>mainly load, store, and ops for common operators (+, -, * etc), plus
>escaped opcode for complicated operators and functions.
While RISC style opcodes have a certain pleasant simplicity to them, the
opcode overhead'll kill us. (If perl 5's anything to go by, and in this
case I think it might be)
>Please note most of common operations will deal with locals, not
>globals. Since almost all locals will fit into register set, the
>generated bytecode will be very small and very fast.
The size of the generated bytecode's likely not going to be directly an
issue in determining speed. (And we can't count on keep the locals
exclusively in the register set either, as otherwise string eval won't be
able to find them, and neither will the debugger)
>The global access is doomed to be slower than locals, especailly
>considering the synchronization overhead associated with threading.
We still may have synchronization issues with threads and lexicals, but
likely far less than with globals.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
