From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Matthew Mundell Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Compilation to native Date: 16 Apr 2004 15:21:37 +0100 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <87k70gdmvi.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> References: <87eks0654s.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <87n06bp4ng.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <877jxccutf.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <87k712gesk.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <87k70lhrsq.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <87wu4jrf3j.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <87d66bg55g.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <20040413205156.GA15097@fencepost> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1082126063 11285 80.91.224.253 (16 Apr 2004 14:34:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 14:34:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Stefan Monnier , rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 16 16:34:16 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BEUQ4-00021S-00 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 16:34:16 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1BEUQ3-0006t6-00 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 16:34:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BEUNW-0008WB-Qn for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:31:38 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BEUNR-0008V2-Gi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:31:33 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BEUJe-0007Ko-D8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:28:09 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.41.8] (helo=mx20.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.30) id 1BEUFK-0004ml-DB; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:23:10 -0400 Original-Received: from [217.158.120.143] (helo=mail.ukfsn.org) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BEUDs-0000qY-Bi; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:21:40 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (lucy.ukfsn.org [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ukfsn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 802C5E6E76; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 15:18:45 +0100 (BST) Original-Received: from mail.ukfsn.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lucy.ukfsn.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 24364-02; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 15:18:45 +0100 (BST) Original-Received: from sno.mundell.ukfsn.org (dsl213-218-238-16.as15444.net [213.218.238.16]) by mail.ukfsn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32AEFE6E33; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 15:18:45 +0100 (BST) Original-Received: from sno.mundell.ukfsn.org ([10.0.0.3]) by sno.mundell.ukfsn.org with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1BEUDq-0000ok-00; Fri, 16 Apr 2004 15:21:38 +0100 Original-To: Miles Bader Original-Lines: 32 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:21769 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:21769 (nobody) writes: > Miles Bader writes: > > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2004 at 01:32:37PM -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > > You mean you added two byteops: one to read the Nth word on the stack > > > (counting from the top) and the other to set that word? I expect you > > > called them something like `sset' and `sref'? > > > Sounds generally useful (something similar is used in the `lexical' branch > > > of Miles, you might want to check that out). > > > > Yes; here are the new byte codes in the lexical-binding branch: > > > > #define Bstack_ref 0 > > #define Bstack_set 0262 > > #define Bstack_set2 0263 > > #define Bvec_ref 0264 > > #define Bvec_set 0265 > > #define BdiscardN 0266 > > > > stack_ref is a `1 byte with embedded constant' opcode; stack_set2 uses a > > following 2-byte constant, > > the rest use a following 1-byte constant (as they > > have lisp-level equivalents, unusually large offsets can be handled by > > calling an out-of-line function). discardN uses a hack that allows the TOS > > to optionally be preserved. Do the 1 and 2 byte constants for stack_ref, stack_set and stack_set2 cater for the maximum size of the stack? Fbyte_code's maxdepth parameter is a Lisp_Int, which suggests that the stack can be at least as large as can be held in 29 bits. Is there perhaps some other restriction on the stack size?