forax at univ-mlv.fr
Mon Jul 2 07:44:31 PDT 2012
On 07/02/2012 04:11 PM, ravenex wrote:
> Very cool stuff, Jim and Rickard!
> I guess people are going to start missing NaN encoded tagged
> value/pointers now that there's something real to play with ;-)
> @Remi The subclass suggestion sounds a lot like Maxine's Hybrid
> objects, where named fields and an untyped array is bundled into a
> single object. Which pretty much emulates what people like to do in
> C/C++, something nice to have.
> > I think that getValue()/setValue() should return the long with the
> bit set because
> > If i want to execute x + 1, I can convert it to x + 2 at compile
> time thus avoid the shifts at runtime.
> Even without changing the API, this kind of transformation could
> easily be intrinsified in the JITs, not a big worry. Cheers, Raven
Yes, it's the Maxine hybrid object and also comes from the fact that
most of the runtime have a common super type,
like RubyObject in JRuby, GroovyObject in Groovy etc. which is used to
provide a base class for some
specialized runtime classes.
More information about the mlvm-dev