|
From: | Daniel Kraft |
Subject: | Re: Possible (summer of code) projects for Octave |
Date: | Tue, 04 Jan 2011 19:35:43 +0100 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070425) |
Søren Hauberg wrote:
man, 03 01 2011 kl. 21:49 +0100, skrev Daniel Kraft:I'm also not really an expert or experienced with JIT technology of related stuff, unfortunately. What I do for gfortran/GCC is basically front-end stuff (like implementation of Fortran 2003 OOP features) and I did not yet touch any optimization or code-generation in GCC. But on the other hand, I guess that using existing frameworks like LLVM the main concern is not compilation technology and code generation but more about how to translate Octave into a more static form.The simplest thing (according to the compiler people I hang out with from time to time) would most likely be to output C++ code. Then the missing part is essentially "just" type estimation. I don't think this is particularly easy, but I'm really no expert here...
But this then means we would try to compile a whole function by writing out a generated C++ implementation of it and then running mkoctfile? Or a little more sophisticated?
I think it would possibly also be useful to JIT only certain blocks of code (like loops which have a large number of iterations but do not contain any complicated (or any at all) function calls). Or do you mean we should/could output also C++ code only for such a loop and have it compiled into a function which is then called instead of interpreting the loop?
BTW, my impression is that mkoctfile takes rather long times to complete -- on the order of some seconds on my system usually. This is not really what I expect as comile-times for JIT'ing code.
Yours, Daniel -- http://www.pro-vegan.info/ -- Done: Arc-Bar-Cav-Kni-Ran-Rog-Sam-Tou-Val-Wiz To go: Hea-Mon-Pri
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |