|Interpreters and computationally intensive programs firstname.lastname@example.org (1992-06-24)|
|Re: Interpreters and computationally intensive programs email@example.com (1992-06-26)|
|Re: Interpreters and computationally intensive programs firstname.lastname@example.org (1992-06-27)|
|Re: Interpreters and computationally intensive programs email@example.com (1992-07-01)|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (Craig Chambers)|
|Organization:||University of Washington|
|Date:||Fri, 26 Jun 1992 13:57:30 GMT|
email@example.com (Sam Kendall) writes:
|> For this reason, a practical interpreter allows the mixing of interpreted
|> and compiled code. An ideal interpreter (not ours, unfortunately) allows
|> you to swap between interpreted and compiled code in the middle of
|> execution, so that you can execute at full speed for a while, then swap
|> some of your program into interpreted code, then continue executing.
My recent PLDI'92 paper (together with Urs Hoelzle and David Ungar)
describes related techniques used in the Self implementation to debug
optimized code. The system transparently de-optimizes optimized
compiled code when it needs to be single-stepped through. When not
single stepping through code, it runs at full optimized speed.
-- Craig Chambers
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.