[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: What's up with token filters (Re: New operators?)
- From: Asko Kauppi <askok@...>
- Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 22:53:47 +0300
Very Tight architectures would only benefit of further sugar
reduction from the core. They tend to use precompiled bytecodes
anyhow, which is behind the token handling stage.
With Andy's idea about C-side-only token filtering, we could have a
continuum of choices for the developers. Pick as much (or little)
sugar as they like.
firstname.lastname@example.org kirjoitti 13.4.2007 kello 19:54:
How about getting token filters into the game, and then _reducing_
even the currently existing sugar (: notation, function name() etc.)
into a joint default token filter (let's say -llua51), and out of
Is there any estimates for the resulting performance? (Not to mention
how to implement the : notation correctly [that is, without extra
effects] with token filters...)
And please let's not forget the implementations that depend on the
small existing core that may not be able to tolerate the additional
RAM and code space requirements of a token filter system.
Unless, of course, the token filter mechanism reduces the overall
code image :-)