On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 07:15:18PM -0400, Josh Wilmes wrote:
>
> At 15:58 on 05/01/2002 PDT, Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I've applied this patch, along with fixing the original resources.c's
> > indentation (re-indenting patches are annoying, but this patch touched
> > enough of
At 15:58 on 05/01/2002 PDT, Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've applied this patch, along with fixing the original resources.c's
> indentation (re-indenting patches are annoying, but this patch touched
> enough of resources.c files that it seemed like a golden opportunity.)
Here are so
I've applied this patch, along with fixing the original resources.c's
indentation (re-indenting patches are annoying, but this patch touched
enough of resources.c files that it seemed like a golden opportunity.)
At 9:52 AM +0100 5/1/02, Leon Brocard wrote:
>Cute, huh? Of course, Java interpreters are very optimised (and
>non-dynamic) and without JITs doing it in Parrot is about 6 times
>slower, but it's interesting nevertheless. Is this the kind of thing I
>should be doing? I've attached a fledgling jvm.o
On Wed, May 01, 2002 at 10:09:11AM -0400, Jeff wrote:
> Nick Glencross wrote:
> >
> > Has anyone given any thought to a gcc backend for generating parrot
> > assembler?
> >
> > Even with a partial implementation in place, it would be presumably be
> > possible to use much of core C, with the ben
Nick Glencross wrote:
>
> Has anyone given any thought to a gcc backend for generating parrot
> assembler?
>
> Even with a partial implementation in place, it would be presumably be
> possible to use much of core C, with the benefits of register
> allocation, optimiser etc.
>
> Obviously it wou
Over the weekend I've been thinking about Targeting Parrot. My
thoughts went something like this: Parrot is a register machine. The
Java virtual machine is a stack machine. Parrot is also a stack
machine. Instead of converting Java bytecode to Parrot bytecode, I can
make Parrot into a JVM. And lo,
