|
From: | Paul Eggert |
Subject: | Re: scratch/accurate-warning-pos: Solid progress: the branch now bootstraps. |
Date: | Mon, 26 Nov 2018 09:43:46 -0800 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.1 |
On 11/25/18 7:41 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
we could have a separate interpreter used only by the byte compiler.I don't think I like this idea: it will be a maintenance burden to maintain two interpreters, and we will have subtle long-lived bugs.
Yes, the only way it's plausible is if we have just one source-code instance of the interpreter, parameterized by whether it's doing things the slower (byte-compiler-oriented) way or the faster (current) way, and then partially evaluate the interpreter for the two cases. In that case the source code should be not much more complicated than scratch/accurate-warning-pos, and the number of subtle long-lived bugs should be about the same as scratch/accurate-warning-pos has now.
As I said, this approach is not for the fainthearted. But it should fix the significant performance problems in scratch/accurate-warning-pos.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |