[squeak-dev] Anyone know the following about Slang?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
24 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [squeak-dev] Anyone know the following about Slang?

keith1y
Eliot Miranda wrote:

> David,
>
>     thanks a lot!  I have some integration to do :)   Not least I want
> to integrate the pragma support in 3.9 back into 3.8 because using
> pragmas instead of the null statements (self var: #foo type: #barf)
> etc is so much nicer.  I also have to produce bootstraps for the
> closure compiler in a few images, e.g. Croquet 1.0, 3.9, 3.10 & Spoon.
>  Once I get the Croquet bootstrap done I would welcome volunteers for
> the others.
>
> cheers!
I am curious as to how you intent to distribute these backported
bootstraps? Is this something
http://installer.pbwiki.com/LevelPlayingField can help you with?

regards

Keith

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [squeak-dev] Anyone know the following about Slang?

David T. Lewis
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 11:18:50AM +0100, Keith Hodges wrote:

> Eliot Miranda wrote:
> >David,
> >
> >    thanks a lot!  I have some integration to do :)   Not least I want
> >to integrate the pragma support in 3.9 back into 3.8 because using
> >pragmas instead of the null statements (self var: #foo type: #barf)
> >etc is so much nicer.  I also have to produce bootstraps for the
> >closure compiler in a few images, e.g. Croquet 1.0, 3.9, 3.10 & Spoon.
> > Once I get the Croquet bootstrap done I would welcome volunteers for
> >the others.
> >
> >cheers!
> I am curious as to how you intent to distribute these backported
> bootstraps? Is this something
> http://installer.pbwiki.com/LevelPlayingField can help you with?

I will put the bug fixes on Mantis in the usual manner, probably within
the next two weeks. I'll also post a copy of this to the vm-dev list so
it does not get lost.

The main part of the work (MemoryAccess class replacing C macros in the
support code) is just a hobby experiment and may never be suitable for
general use. If it did turn out to be unexpected popular or useful, I would
still have a lot more work to do before it could be supported in VMMaker.
I would need to make sure that the InterpreterSimulator still works, and
I'd have to reorganize it in some way to make it possible to easily turn
off this "feature" for the 99% of folks who would prefer VM speed over VM
hackability. To be clear, I have no plan to do any of this.

Dave


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [squeak-dev] Anyone know the following about Slang?

Igor Stasenko
I wonder, is it would be better to support reverse, like by declaring:

self macro: true.

in method body , tell CodeGenerator to generate a macro definition
instead of C function?


--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [squeak-dev] Anyone know the following about Slang?

Eliot Miranda-2


On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 4:16 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote:
I wonder, is it would be better to support reverse, like by declaring:

self macro: true.

in method body , tell CodeGenerator to generate a macro definition
instead of C function?

I've added support for the following:
stackPageAt: index pages: thePages
<cmacro: '(index,pages) ((pages) + (index) - 1)'>
^thePages at: index

which generates

#define stackPageAtpages(index,pages) ((pages) + (index) - 1)

but this is using a 3.8/Tweak method property and I want it to be a proper pragma.
 


12