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 09:28:06 -0500 Message-ID: References: <8738wsonml.fsf@tines.lan> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b111bad6730fc04d614a6c9 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1361284102 5134 80.91.229.3 (19 Feb 2013 14:28:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:28:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel To: Mark H Weaver Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 19 15:28:45 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 1U7oBU-0001lz-Us for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 15:28:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36533 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7oBA-0008Ll-TL for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:28:20 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49794) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7oB3-0008LK-Pn for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:28:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7oAx-0000dx-Qs for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:28:13 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com ([209.85.160.44]:39969) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7oAx-0000do-Kn for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 09:28:07 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id wz12so2291762pbc.17 for ; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 06:28:06 -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=cPZ/1Lk28CdgIGqAoq+WMeH/mkCUA6EjSRg+HQhWl1I=; b=MhaREFnwsmspmu0NbcaMSUtmcSp3NXx8YZ53vZd5yfKpen15vL58GANQsAABK4aZ1u VhtPzd0pfu6vIF8Pcr1MZAzbi79ySW2zTv/SUzQlvmf3noW35XJBnrO4P6K43emjiZee yxIquLTJ5RP221KbNq7ljc4wbEjvKcoiX3sbHecra9/4HwP1KuWtRg/e6enFdO1cyFzk rWHbOgpRLaKQjNXbUbJTPhQRnTsEJj1q+9GNr7ANVNpYi522dvmE+rE5vPMFq5Wl1+h5 yxrtltDS7w0Tcy/1QrK4wcC1UQB9+h7hBtz5EWFOq5+fXhjCKJc++d1Pigdp0R7zcwS7 8a1A== X-Received: by 10.68.209.134 with SMTP id mm6mr40467358pbc.3.1361284086313; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 06:28:06 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.68.157.42 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 06:28:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <8738wsonml.fsf@tines.lan> X-Google-Sender-Auth: RPjRglygtTWL4pN8iB_mjXMxLzI X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.160.44 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:15776 Archived-At: --047d7b111bad6730fc04d614a6c9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 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 > --047d7b111bad6730fc04d614a6c9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
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@n= etris.org> wrote:
Hi N= oah,

"Noah Lavine" <noah= .b.lavine@gmail.com> writes:
> commit 0d0808ae3f7390ffb250b9deb6706ad4158cce0e
> Author: Noah Lavine <noa= h.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

--047d7b111bad6730fc04d614a6c9--