From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Noah Lavine Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [Guile-commits] GNU Guile branch, wip-rtl-cps, updated. v2.1.0-180-g0d0808a Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:28:56 -0500 Message-ID: References: <8738wsonml.fsf@tines.lan> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b338f1f67142c04d614a97d X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1361284150 5528 80.91.229.3 (19 Feb 2013 14:29:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:29:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Mark H Weaver , guile-devel To: Noah Lavine Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 19 15:29:32 2013 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 1U7oCK-0002Dg-HM for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 15:29:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36688 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7oC0-0008UE-Ah for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:29:12 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:50203) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7oBp-0008Sv-2w for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:29:09 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7oBl-0000xN-JP for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:29:00 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pb0-f47.google.com ([209.85.160.47]:47440) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7oBl-0000xB-A3 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:28:57 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pb0-f47.google.com with SMTP id rp2so2257179pbb.6 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 06:28:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=W/BHHiYpk3TMycktZhbNVAXp7dQkgYRSJrA6SV8ODIg=; b=wpek6Pa46XcVDUZCcO/GBzKEQzYXIKbl5sj6YTaWxQPX6Qc/VgUwS+DrLEESU7XUFo KgzSY3dhsBD7SNB9fFmejbsP19KKM+gTsg+81bgQ5b8jB2c93T0ynxDfL6rBu3vk2ZHW 6dI7DXsQvK7AhVusGp8r/HNR2vlVfhQFASjuMgYFWgxyz6m2gde6TU4Ucqtkz25l32na hHLNx+m6ccarC6MdZf1spjZCEW8/a2rwaxIS3+LJh3uyNfMdtugf0ad3Nhe0HnQmNv91 jw2F7F8U/5vDgCAWklSOg7RkNazj18kTHnE1XrULCTCf1tkrmoM0lTyZQufk+Dp59/IS HeyA== X-Received: by 10.68.237.165 with SMTP id vd5mr40716837pbc.52.1361284136637; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 06:28:56 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.68.157.42 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 06:28:56 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-Google-Sender-Auth: jYxMh_sUDacLucLy5CAX48IZo9E X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.160.47 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:15777 Archived-At: --047d7b338f1f67142c04d614a97d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Oh, and thanks a lot for reviewing the CPS stuff! I really appreciate it, and I think it will make the end result a lot better than whatever I could do on my own. Noah On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:28 AM, Noah Lavine wrote: > Hello, > > Yes, I completely agree with this. I didn't do that immediately because > I'm trying to get the infrastructure for the general case working. I plan > to implement un-boxing in CPS. The real reason not to do it yet is that the > tree-il-CPS compiler can't compile any examples that would actually need > boxes. (But it will be able to soon!) > > Noah > > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:53 AM, Mark H Weaver wrote: > >> Hi Noah, >> >> "Noah Lavine" writes: >> > commit 0d0808ae3f7390ffb250b9deb6706ad4158cce0e >> > Author: Noah Lavine >> > Date: Mon Feb 18 14:10:58 2013 -0500 >> > >> > Make Lambda Arguments Mutable >> > >> > * module/language/cps.scm: let variable objects come with an >> > initialization value. >> > * module/language/tree-il/compile-cps.scm: put all lambda arguments >> in >> > variable boxes, so they are mutable. >> >> Lambda arguments (and all other lexical variables) should only be put >> into boxes if they are 'set!' somewhere within their lexical scope. >> This can always be determined at compile time. It is crucial that we >> minimize the number of mutable variables, since they inhibit most >> optimizations. >> >> The required analysis is already implemented in tree-il/analyze.scm. >> >> Regards, >> Mark >> > > --047d7b338f1f67142c04d614a97d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Oh, and thanks a lot for reviewing the CPS stuff! I really= appreciate it, and I think it will make the end result a lot better than w= hatever I could do on my own.

Noah


On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:28 AM, Noah La= vine <noah.b.lavine@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,

Yes, I completely agree with thi= s. I didn't do that immediately because I'm trying to get the infra= structure for the general case working. I plan to implement un-boxing in CP= S. The real reason not to do it yet is that the tree-il-CPS compiler can= 9;t compile any examples that would actually need boxes. (But it will be ab= le to soon!)

Noah


On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 12:53 AM, Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> wrote:
Hi Noah,

"Noah Lavine" <noah.b.lavine@gmail.com> writes:
> commit 0d0808ae3f7390ffb250b9deb6706ad4158cce0e
> Author: Noah Lavine <noah.b.lavine@gmail.com>
> Date: =A0 Mon Feb 18 14:10:58 2013 -0500
>
> =A0 =A0 Make Lambda Arguments Mutable
>
> =A0 =A0 * module/language/cps.scm: let variable objects come with an > =A0 =A0 =A0 initialization value.
> =A0 =A0 * module/language/tree-il/compile-cps.scm: put all lambda argu= ments in
> =A0 =A0 =A0 variable boxes, so they are mutable.

Lambda arguments (and all other lexical variables) should only be put
into boxes if they are 'set!' somewhere within their lexical scope.=
This can always be determined at compile time. =A0It is crucial that we
minimize the number of mutable variables, since they inhibit most
optimizations.

The required analysis is already implemented in tree-il/analyze.scm.

=A0 =A0 =A0Regards,
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Mark


--047d7b338f1f67142c04d614a97d--