harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robin Garner <robin.gar...@anu.edu.au>
Subject Re: [drlvm][sablevm] Desing of Class Unloading Support
Date Thu, 09 Nov 2006 12:49:51 GMT
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> 
> 
> Weldon Washburn wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/8/06, *Geir Magnusson Jr.* <geir@pobox.com 
>> <mailto:geir@pobox.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>     Weldon Washburn wrote:
>>      > On 11/7/06, Ivan Volosyuk < ivan.volosyuk@gmail.com
>>     <mailto:ivan.volosyuk@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>      >>
>>      >> On 07 Nov 2006 14:35:55 +0600, Egor Pasko <egor.pasko@gmail.com
>>     <mailto:egor.pasko@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>      >> > > I already have one idea how to benefit from movable vtables.
>>      >
>>      >
>>      > There would have to be a very compelling argument for making 
>> vtables
>>      > movable.  Like a business workload that Harmony needs to run
>>     within the
>>      > next
>>      > 12 months.
>>
>>     How would a business workload need this directly?
>>  
>> That's the point.  I can't figure out any compelling story for moving 
>> vtables.  As far as I can tell, its over-engineering.   I would love 
>> to be proven wrong.
> 
> But isn't this simply an implementation detail of something that is 
> important, namely the class unloading?
> 
> geir

While it did come up as an issue in the class-unloading talks I think 
most of us believe it to be orthogonal.

cheers

-- 
Robin Garner
Dept. of Computer Science
Australian National University

Mime
View raw message