deferred vtable assignment?

[David L. Nicol]

Dan Sugalski wrote:

> >2) Anyway, even resizing vtables we would need some more indirection to
> >determine in which position of the vtable is which operator.
> 
> No. Each operator goes in a fixed position in the vtable, and it's the same
> for each table. Anything else is nasty, error prone, and slow.

What if the decision in-vtable or not-in-vtable is deferred? The size
of the vtable could be chosen late in the compilation.  There could be
hints.

I am right now imagining vtable slots analogous to register entries
for data in a C function.  That we we also can deal with the aliasing
of comparison operators to a variety of cmp/<==> (or not) on a case-by-case
basis.


if it is supposed to be an optimization, keep it an optimization, with
a fall-back to a non-optimized paradigm.





-- 
                      David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
                                      and they all say "yodelahihu"