Re: Question about SETFIELD nil emission in table constructor codegen

'Bernard L'île' via lua-l <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lang.lua.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Concerning literal tables, I've always asked myself why the compiler does 
not build table literals with only constant members at compile time and 
stores them in a constant pool, as it already does for strings and scalars.

As a further optimizations, table literals with variable components *could* 
(but need not) be built at compile time and then augmented with setfield 
opcodes to fill in the variable parts.

bil til schrieb am Samstag, 28. Februar 2026 um 09:44:50 UTC+1:

> Am Sa., 28. Feb. 2026 um 03:24 Uhr schrieb 重归混沌 <[email protected]>:
> >
> > for constructor fields that are statically unique and explicitly nil, is 
> there any specific semantic reason these SETFIELD instructions must still 
> be emitted? Or is this mainly a
>
> Lua compiler generally is NOT optimizing in any way... .
>
> ... the code is in full programmer control (and responsibility :) ).
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lua-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lua-l/52ddf9da-3cbe-4319-a5ee-13a7ae11290en%40googlegroups.com.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.