Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: Greetings. :)
- To: Multiple Recipients of MUD Design Mailing List <mud-dev#null,net>
- Subject: Re: Greetings. :)
- From: Jeff Kesselman <jeffk#tenetwork,com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Apr 1997 23:15:43 -0700
At 11:48 AM 4/9/97 -1000, you wrote:
>On Mon, 7 Apr 1997, Chris Gray wrote:
>
>:Ok, terminology differences. I think of bytecodes as interpreted. Perhaps
>:'simulated' is a better word. 'Emulated'?
>:
>:Perhaps we can come up with a gradient (I'm sure this has been done
before!),
>:and we can all point to where we are on it:
>:
>:1. native machine code
>:2. threaded code
>:3. bytecode
>:4. parse tree traversal
>:5. pre-tokenized interpretation
>:6. straight text interpretation
Hmm, theres a wide range in 3.
Ild devide it as follows...
3a) Byte code on a true VM (generally a stack based system with a small number
of highly efficiently parsed opcodes). My Kelvin VM is this, a
stack based OO machine with about 15 opcodes total.
3b) Tokenized form. Thsi is where every statement (if, while, etc) has a
corrosponding byte code. Coldmud/ColdX does this.,
JK
>:
>:You're at 3? I'm at 4 in AmigaMUD, 6 in ToyMud. However, differences
>:like the need for run-time symbol lookup, or type conversions, can easily
>:move something up a notch in execution overhead. LP is at 3 now isn't
>:it? Are MOO and ColdX at 3 as well? Let's see, REXX is 5? Tcl is 6.
>:Shell scripts are 6+, Perl is 5? This is just *so* relevant to MUDs! :-/
>
>Erm. I'm a rather strange hybrid of 1, 2, and 4. But... well, I'm not sure
>what you mean by parse tree transversal... what I've got is referenced
>blocks of native code getting tacked together by dereferenced function
>pointers, dynamicly when needed, staticly when possible. In theory, the
>whole chunk should be about 3/2 machine, but I'm coming from a PPC asm
>bias, and that neglects any compiler optimizations rendered impossible by
>this scheme. Its also about 3/1 machine for memory, so far... The flaw is
>that it renders bootup a much longer process, as most of the work gets
>done then, and is impossible to save in a reusable form, as some addresses
>are locally dependent at startup time, thanks to the dynaload provisions,
>in part. Any suggestions or criticisms by the more experienced?
>
> __ _ __ _ _ , , , ,
> /_ / / ) /_ /_) / ) /| /| / /\ First Light of a Nova Dawn
> / / / \ /_ /_) / \ /-|/ |/ /_/ Final Night of a World Gone
>Nathan F. Yospe - University of Hawaii Dept of Physics - yospe#hawaii,edu
>
>
- Thread context:
- Re: Greetings. :), (continued)
- Re: Greetings. :),
Greg Munt greg#uni-corn,demon.co.uk, Thu 10 Apr 1997, 01:36 GMT
- Re: Greetings. :),
Nathan Yospe yospe#hawaii,edu, Thu 10 Apr 1997, 04:42 GMT
- Re: Greetings. :),
Jon A. Lambert jlsysinc#ix,netcom.com, Thu 10 Apr 1997, 12:20 GMT
- Re: Greetings. :),
Jon A. Lambert jlsysinc#ix,netcom.com, Thu 10 Apr 1997, 12:47 GMT
- Re: Greetings. :),
Jeff Kesselman jeffk#tenetwork,com, Thu 10 Apr 1997, 13:06 GMT
- Re: Greetings. :),
Jeff Kesselman jeffk#tenetwork,com, Thu 10 Apr 1997, 13:46 GMT
- Re: Greetings. :),
Shawn Halpenny rsh#dos,nortel.com, Thu 10 Apr 1997, 22:45 GMT
- Re: Greetings. :),
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Fri 11 Apr 1997, 13:01 GMT
- Re: Greetings. :),
clawrenc clawrenc#xsvr1,cup.hp.com, Sat 12 Apr 1997, 04:31 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]