[Ecls-list] ECL + ContextL?

[Alexander Gavrilov]

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Juan Jose Garcia-Ripoll
<juanjose.garciaripoll at googlemail.com> wrote:
> ECL and GCL and any other C based compiler are going to have this
> problem always... Unless, of course, the C compiler itself can be
> embedded in the environment itself.

I'm not complaining, I just think that it is a valid technical reason
to re-evaluate the tradeoff between bytecode and compilation for
dynamic code. I wonder how big is the actual speed difference
for the kind of simple functions that are used in contextl.

> However, I think we are on the right track: my local tree already has
> a new version of the lisp-to-C translator that uses a different
> internal representation. It is not ready for production, but it
> features a simpler code flow graph that could be used both for better
> type inference and also, hopefully, to produce LLVM's desired
> representation.

How is it going to affect ffi:c-inline? Currently ECL seems to be the
only implementation where it is reasonably possible to use SSE
instructions, by means of generating inline C code fragments
with SSE intrinsics via compiler macros.

Alexander