Tom Hughes wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> while (pc) {
>> argp1 = ...pmc_reg.registers[cur_opcode[1]];
>> if (*pc & KEY1_MASK) {
>> key1 = ...pmc_reg.registers[cur_opcode[2]]; /* for p_k */
>> argp1 = get_keyed_entry(argp1, key1, flags);
>> }
>> ...
>> PC = (INTERP->op_func_table)[*PC & KEY_MASK]( ... );
>> PC += n_keys; /* account for additonal keys in bytecode */
>> }
>>
>> which would call add_p_p_p(argp1, argp2, argp3).
>>
>>"argp" points either directly to the PMC register, or for keys, into
>>the bucket, where the PMC is stored in the aggregate. Of course, argp
>>shouldn't move due to GC while processing one op.
>>
>
> This may be all fine and dandy for the prederef case but it's going to
> force the opcode functions to do a lot more work working out where to
> get the key from in all the other cases.
No, this would be the run loop for _all_ cores. So _all_ keyed access is
taken out of the vtable function and done in the run loop.
> It also prevents you using the optimised _int vtable methods for keyed
> access using integer keys...
I don't see that. Were we now have op_keyed and op_keyed_int, we could
still use this optimization by calling op_p and op_i.
> Tom
leo
