[gambit-list] gambit + llvm
Christian Jaeger
christian at pflanze.mine.nu
Mon Sep 22 16:58:35 EDT 2008
Thanks for the reply.
Alex Sandro Queiroz e Silva wrote:
> I was talking indeed about size. The GHC distribution for Windows
> does exactly what you suggested. ...
Interesting.
> The good applications of this kind let the user enter their own
> technical indicators (usually in an ad-hoc scripting language) and let
> the user run them on the previous stock data to see how good they are.
> Generating a shared object for each run would quickly degenerate in lots
> of shared objects in the user hard-disk. I know this is fixable, but
> it's nevertheless an annoyance.
>
Yep. One idea is to create a hash value of the (expanded) source code
s-expression (i.e. the final compiler input) and use that for the file
name, so that you never recompile if the input is the same. (And clean
up on the basis of atime or randomly.)
I certainly agree that compiling directly to memory may be sensible in
such a case. There are things to keep in mind though: if you serialize
closures or continuations from such code, you won't be able to
deserialize them after a restart of the system (unless you first compile
the same code (to memory) again -- or include the assembly code inside
the serialization, which you don't really want to do). (This is
something also in need of some care with the file based approach
(modulesystem...). I just thought I'd mention it here.)
Christian.
More information about the Gambit-list
mailing list