On Wed, 10 Oct 2012, Pascal Costanza wrote:
Common Lisp in general has a more traditional performance model, in that it relies on staticish compilation for performance, rather than dynamic compilation as is done in Java, JavaScript, Lua, etc. With dynamic compilation, such issues may be easier to tackle, although I suspect that this would require still some non-trivial amount of research. (Changing the metaclass of a class needs to update not only the class, but also its instances, and since you potentially have an unlimited depth in the hierarchy of metaclasses, this can be quite complicated to express in a sane way.)
All these techniques boil down to partial evaluation. Still looking for a language that allows good static PE (where time can be spent for deep analysis), good dynamic PE (where data-specific behaviors can be observed), and a good annotation mechanism for bringing it all together (possibly allowing the programmer to describe behavior that crosses both domains, but at least preserving dynamic info across processes).
On 9 Oct 2012, at 22:44, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll <juanjose.garciarip...@gmail.com> wrote: In an extremely open-minded setup, where any class is prone to change, not only their structure, but also their metaclass, it would seem that a local declaration of the kind (DECLARE (MY-CLASS FOO)) would be totally useless.
Slava Pestov did a few really nice things with Factor. In particular, he had a mechanism that would dynamically trigger recompilation when "open coded/inlined" details changed (e.g. macro redefintion). This declaration would be a good point to store such a hook in CL...
http://factorcode.org/ http://docs.factorcode.org/content/article-vocabs.refresh.html http://docs.factorcode.org/content/article-tuple-redefinition.html - Daniel _______________________________________________ pro mailing list pro@common-lisp.net http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
