2009/12/5 Lukas Renggli <
[hidden email]>:
> We recently had a discussion on tail-call optimization at the SCG. In
> one of my Pharo image I counted 160464 send locations, of which only
> 8884 would allow for tail call optimization (5.5%).
>
> Tail call optimization could certainly be implemented at the VM level,
> but I don't know if the additional checks and complexity would be
> worth the effort for these few locations? VM experts might be able to
> tell more ...
>
> Also I think it would be rather confusing to debug a tail-call
> optimized program in the debugger (random stack frames would be
> missing).
>
I am also looking suspiciously on such kind of optimization for smalltalk,
because it could make debugging harder as well as breaking a reflection, since
you can't be sure that 'thisContext sender' is one that actually made a call.
In languages with lower reflection bar, such optimization could be
employed, but in smalltalk, i doubt.
> Lukas
--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Locked
