Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 87737 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2008 23:13:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Apr 2008 23:13:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 35620 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2008 23:13:46 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 35597 invoked by uid 500); 1 Apr 2008 23:13:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 35588 invoked by uid 99); 1 Apr 2008 23:13:46 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:13:46 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of alexei.fedotov@gmail.com designates 66.249.92.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [66.249.92.175] (HELO ug-out-1314.google.com) (66.249.92.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 23:13:05 +0000 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id u40so267818ugc.3 for ; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:13:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=Y+zA7Jd+Z+D46AmgYZJSx7VY5YOcOzsOVyEuCJJ+x5c=; b=MX9lffK5r3brBUBSGfIB30CORZzOYmktIfN2VbNLClqJFhOD51QJwpIzHvWNef/JD19KHZV0UJhnde5xrZS9/VOontQGLjf8zaP4QDW/cq03KUw1XF7ydHJTCFz7cmXrXt48Za3P5lvJAFEy79BZMgSLnCCINO+1g07v7vvkefY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=oXNRZb4HU2eOdrYLGwn2lOTiua9NB0JpyTZ7m9MmDMg3nYJPmKUosrtjQQRL2m2itNq+zVZEJNw6jr62gjvFimG9jVNwF5hYIKPSJA/ndlAtXf/c2FBlK46qrrIKAjz8UOX8jG0y4fkIGFrX494fkAO56xBDwyMsKFkNBlrE2Nk= Received: by 10.66.221.5 with SMTP id t5mr29086ugg.83.1207091595766; Tue, 01 Apr 2008 16:13:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.67.21.8 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 16:13:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 03:13:15 +0400 From: "Alexei Fedotov" To: dev@harmony.apache.org Subject: Re: [general] GSoC 2008 Refactor Java Bytecode Translator In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <884d1faa0803192322o7b9f58dfja181970fbe2f882e@mail.gmail.com> <0vqabkhhgrh.fsf@gmail.com> <884d1faa0803300533h181c323cv4a8d5ee9875ff059@mail.gmail.com> <884d1faa0803301138v1e84b867wfcc907cf86ccd20c@mail.gmail.com> <0vq4panf42u.fsf@gmail.com> <884d1faa0803310936i5703e01ck71798eff11a88993@mail.gmail.com> <0vqmyoeeca5.fsf@gmail.com> <884d1faa0804010847m1b0ad0a9v3b58360cf6037d90@mail.gmail.com> <0vq8wzxdyy9.fsf@gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org One more idea on further rewriting. 1. An old verifier built some IR on the top of bytecode. 2. A new verifier also does parsing, but is more like JET. You may think of building a reusable component. I wonder if conventional parser generators or ASN.1 are applicable here. Note, thinking is different from starting doing, there are cases when a specific solution is better than reusable. On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:02 AM, Alexei Fedotov wrote: > Hello, Kostya, > > Do you think it would be good to reflect Egor's (and mine) idea of an > evolutionary path during learning period during the first step of your > plan? Namely, incremental approach to IR separation are subsequent > patches to the existing code base. Each of the patches does the > following: > 1. Removes some optimization from the parsing stage. > 2. Adds necessary infrastructure to HIR. > 3. Adds or ensures that the optimization is done on HIR. > > This would help attacking the problem and learning a parser, HIR and > tools incrementally. On completion of this step you would have your > code committed to Harmony and get more confidence. Moreover the code > which enhances HIR would be close to final. In process you will learn > why the existing IR builder is bad and grow a desire to attack it > fully rewriting the code. > > What do you think? > > > > > On 02 Apr 2008 01:53:18 +0400, Egor Pasko wrote: > > On the 0x419 day of Apache Harmony Okonechnikov Konstantin wrote: > > > > Let's not remove copy propagation, it does not make the code > > > > difficult, does not add lots of lines, but still very functional. > > > > > > > > OK? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Egor Pasko > > > > > > > > > > > OK, got it. > > > What are the requirments for simplify and hvn passes? > > > > what do you mean by requirements? they should optimize the code, that > > is one requirement, but if they make things slower in some cases, that > > happens too :) > > > > > > > Currently I am testing using this optimizer > > > chain: ssa,devirt,inline,purge,simplify,dce,uce... (didn't include hvn yet) > > > > we can check later whether we need hvn here or not > > > > > > > BTW, I' ve updated my application and put it on the wiki > > > http://wiki.apache.org/general/WikiTranslatorRefactoringProposal. > > > > doing good, probably somebody can give more valuable comments now. > > > > -- > > Egor Pasko > > > > > > > > -- > With best regards, > Alexei > -- With best regards, Alexei