harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Astapchuk <alex.astapc...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm][jit] Moving jet to the top level of drlvm...
Date Mon, 06 Nov 2006 11:48:46 GMT
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> Alex Astapchuk wrote:
>> Pavel Pervov wrote:
>>> Hello, community,
>>> Working through DRLVM sources I (once again) looked at organization of
>>> jitrino code.
>>> Actually, there are two JITs hidden inside "jitrino": JET and OPT.
>>> As far as I may observe - these two are code-independent from each 
>>> other.
>>> JIT-guys, could you comment?
>>> If I'm right here I would vote for moving them to top level of
>>> drlvm/trunk/vm directory to clearly indicate we have two JITs in DRLVM.
>> There are no two JITs, actually. We call them 'compilation paths'.
>> 'jet' here stands for 'Jitrino Express compilation paTh'.
>> As Mikhail already mentioned they share significant parts like
>> logging, PMF, multi-threaded stuff, guard locks, etc.
>> The difference in codebases, came from their targets - the .jet was 
>> heavily tuned for very fast compilation, resulting to that many virtual
>> interfaces used in .opt were substituted with direct calls to VM.
>> Personally, I don't see any *practical* reason to separate .jet and .opt.
> The practical reason is to start convincing ourselves of the modularity.

Ugh. 'Modularity' is good word, I like it.
Especially taking into account that no one can measure it. Can you? :-)

Moving jet around will give nothing useful. Neither in a short-term nor 
in a longer perspective. But will take an efforts and add a mess and 
maybe code duplicate from Jitrino codebase.

Jitrino itself is modular enough - again, the JET was not intended as a 
separate JIT. It's only purpose was (and still is) to be a front-line 
for Jitrino's main engine - to speed up client apps startup.

Absolutely no reason to have it separately.


View raw message