Re: Prothon IS different inside

On Saturday 10 July 2004 01:50 pm, Mark Hahn wrote:
> Paul Prescod wrote:
> > Python's interpreter is totally object oriented.
>
> Then it must only be Parrot.  I shouldn't have included Python in that
> tirade.  I made an incorrect leap in conclusions.  So Python and Prothon
> are in the same boat when it comes to porting to Parrot.
>
> Parrot has four sets of registers.  Only one of the four holds objects.
> About three fourths of Parrot would be wasted when running Python or
> Prothon.
>

I've been thinking about this and I think that while at first we may not use 
much of the other three other registers, over time optimizations will begin 
to use them.

Take for instance Int.add_(). This is implemented in C right now. You have 
three options if you decide to port to Parrot:

(1) Keep it in C in a Parrot extension module.

(2) Keep it in Parrot Bytecode in a Parrot extension module. (Think Pyrex.) 
This will use the other three registers heavily.

(3) Compile calls to Int.add_() into Parrot Bytecode (basically, inlining 
(2) above). (Think Psyco.)

Perhaps most of the user written code will be compiled into bytecodes that 
use the P registers principally, but all the underlying code will be 
compiled such that it can make heavy use of the other three registers, or 
it will be written in C, or a combination of the two.

So I wouldn't worry about this yet as it isn't an issue.

-- 
Jonathan Gardner
[email protected]