From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: Register VM WIP Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 18:39:26 +0200 Message-ID: <87aa18hygx.fsf@pobox.com> References: <871umqr8q0.fsf@pobox.com> <873972zczy.fsf@gnu.org> <87bolpmgew.fsf@pobox.com> <871umkbvp3.fsf@netris.org> <87fwb0k35g.fsf@pobox.com> <87sjf09r5v.fsf@netris.org> <87r4uki35b.fsf@pobox.com> <87obpo9jmp.fsf@netris.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1337186391 9511 80.91.229.3 (16 May 2012 16:39:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 16:39:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= , guile-devel@gnu.org To: Mark H Weaver Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 16 18:39:48 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SUhGJ-0008KQ-IS for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 May 2012 18:39:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42024 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SUhGI-0005nU-OX for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 16 May 2012 12:39:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:37150) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SUhGF-0005n5-1W for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 16 May 2012 12:39:40 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SUhG9-00069L-UX for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 16 May 2012 12:39:38 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([74.115.168.62]:46143 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SUhG9-00068V-LB; Wed, 16 May 2012 12:39:33 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A6A19002; Wed, 16 May 2012 12:39:30 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=MSRRIvFTf+Bm4RNNriMa6sC1OWw=; b=gx7Sbn IV+89AifiAQp7MzyQiWsLd+zlax7jtz2qgu+m6We9uCdKIOOs9htbZldTGg1tzX1 o8/rxlOH6u8N7R/cOapdeLWfHUcG/FN6yWHToPt8RGrP6seDRymLaLZjsK3v/26M NW4uAoqP8yGZ/89qMgvO0gfm+bHljc1fYCs3I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=HpuPDU24b4QFGu2JGmVFet4JuQ54JK7z zkePNRxxG4Xkat3pC4EWtEIzZPsuHJ88bjKO+n9BYkeV01wT5rheBWuWx+Qy6PJ5 k9fwfAsmLonwrejDGlGu5u0Yjr6K90vd0OZIiHwjOqnoI9XtVHmQqPdlbg9twgJr BrZkvMolqnc= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 529229001; Wed, 16 May 2012 12:39:30 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from badger (unknown [85.50.188.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4E8178FF9; Wed, 16 May 2012 12:39:29 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87obpo9jmp.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Wed, 16 May 2012 12:27:10 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: B5041192-9F75-11E1-948F-E981AF15ED39-02397024!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 74.115.168.62 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:14471 Archived-At: On Wed 16 May 2012 18:27, Mark H Weaver writes: > What's your plan for saving and restoring such a large register file? Here it's clear that I didn't communicate well. What I am terming a "register" is a value in a local stack slot. That's all. No need to save and restore, since they're already on the stack. In a virtual machine, it doesn't make sense to have registers in the hardware sense, I don't think. Perhaps it needs a different name than "register virtual machine". Andy -- http://wingolog.org/