OpenEuphoria

Re: Interpreter startup speed

• Posted by Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com> Aug 19, 2006
• 648 views

Jason Gade wrote:
> 
> Al Getz wrote:
> > Hi Jason,
> > 
> > Yes that's an interesting idea too, if we had control over what
> > 'thread' gets compiled first.  I would certainly do something like
> > that.
> > 
> > 
> > Al
> > 
> > E boa sorte com sua programacao Euphoria!
> > 
> > 
> > My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
> > 
> 
> I'm not saying to compile certain threads of the user program first; I'm
> saying
> the interpreter should have a compiler thread and a interpreter thread. The
> compiler thread compiles the first few hundred (or thousand or whatever)
> instructions
> to IL code and then starts the interpreter thread. The compiler thread
> continues
> compiling in the background (well, both threads would be trading off really).
> If the interpreter thread ran out of instructions it would sleep for awhile
> until the compiler thread caught up again.
> 
> Once the compiler thread finished converting the entire program to IL, it
> would
> exit leaving just the interpreter.
> 
> --
> "Any programming problem can be solved by adding a level of indirection."
> --anonymous
> "Any performance problem can be solved by removing a level of indirection."
> --M. Haertel
> "Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
> --C.A.R. Hoare
> j.

Yes that sounds better :)


Take care,
Al

E boa sorte com sua programacao Euphoria!


My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"

 From "Black Knight":
"I can live with losing the good fight,
 but i can not live without fighting it".
"Well on second thought, maybe not."